# In KY



## Free Range

> Some are trying to so discredit our own KDFWR, as to accuse them of "dictating" and "holding a gun to their heads"!! Simply because the Dept didn't "bow down to them" over the crossbow expansion issue, and instead listened to the many voices of the majority who wish to have full expansion!


Also some accuse the pro bowhunting side of holding a gun to the head of the KY DNR forcing them to accept a compromise. 



> placed KY near the top in Book Bucks (which some seem to really care about),


Must be the pro x-bow guys



> (which *I* even worked toward after this in my mind "bogus" ...."Compromise", right up to they started trying to "rub our noses in them keeping US out of the pre-rut).....


Should I pull up all the threads where you rubed our nose in the Cornell Survey and how, when you thought the full expansion was going through how many times you tried to rub our nose in it??? Careful Ace you know what they say about glass houses.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Also some accuse the pro bowhunting side of holding a gun to the head of the KY DNR forcing them to accept a compromise.
> 
> Big difference in unfounded accusations, and those with facts to back them up, ole boy from Colorado.....
> 
> 
> 
> Must be the pro x-bow guys
> 
> Must be nice in your dream world, hope you don't get stuck in there, you may find it very hard to function in the real world, where the truth, facts, and actual , factual data DO matterIt was the KDFWR using sound game management practices, and the results speak vlovumes for themselves, that would be the same KDFWR that decided based on sound data to expand OUR crossbow season to run with archery btwTHEY do an awesome job when left alone, to do it, as they should with such a staff of trained wildlife biologists fwiw
> 
> 
> 
> Should I pull up all the threads where you rubed our nose in the Cornell Survey and how, when you thought the full expansion was going through how many times you tried to rub our nose in it??? Careful Ace you know what they say about glass houses.


Please feel free to post anything , whatever you wish......at least *I* have a "stake" in what happens, in Kentucky, unlike YOU "instigating" non-stop, including as you "brag" about giving the opposition the idea, of a 70/30 split season.......I only hope that when something YOU believe in and fight for comes up, that YOU don't face such BS from other hunters, and I actually mean that, NO good comes from this type of behavior.....

No matter we gained the respect of most all in Ky by playing by the established rules, which they did not, and in the end, as suspected they will be the reason of their own demise......which is btw very fitting in my view....:cocktail:

Also be sure to post all the discussions after your ban, from doing exactly what I stated above! THAT should prove, quite a few things, want to continue to speak of glass houses, Tim??

Whatever YOU try to do, you can't change the facts of what happened, give it up! (word to the wise )

The "bow clubs" are the first ones to turn this into a "fight", and caused 100% of the division, because they were and are unwilling to share.....YOU (and a few others) may not like that fact, it's still a fact regardless.....

WE only came into being, to give a "level playing field" , because the "bow groups", said "there is no club or org , which want this, so we must therefore be right, in that no one really wants this, where is their support?".......WE have shown the support, and had our delegate votes count in the LKS convention(a big deal in KY).........all of the other accusations mean squat, just as there is and has been NO proof of anything the "pro-side" has been accused of......

Also FR since YOU like bringing up so much what I post, why not admit, how I predicted the results of the second survey, AND they would mirror the first one(you know the one you keep trying to say was "close"??) I am 100% aware of what was and is going on here, I'd bet it means much more to me than you........glass houses.......get real please.....

YOU only caused more division, and as here only are interested in trying to argue, got you "kicked" from there more than once, so now it's permanent.......must be because your "facts" were so well done?? It WAS because of your constant trying to argue, disputing EVERY fact, regardless of where it came, from, JUST exactly as you have here so often said the first survey was "close", it's obvious to everyone, it wasn't OR the KDFWR would have NOT went forward with the expansion, so rather than to insist on trying to argue, how about YOU present relevent facts and real data, that support YOUR views, instead of trying to "trash" everyone else's ideas, or what was posted a year ago, or anything else, that you can attempt to do to cause problems, rather focus on data, and facts....

See, that would be a good discussion......NO reason to get so personal, and as you admitted get into a pi$$ing match with me every chance you get, dispute(if you can) what I post with relevent facts, not opinions, as I always try to do......

I will promise you though, IF you insist on "pulling up old threads", I can do the same, we'll show everyone what part YOU played in "Unity"....I'd suggest you keep the personal crap out of this from this point on.....


----------



## aceoky

THE one major concern was Ky turkey flock, which some maintained the hatches had been poor, and the KDFWR needed to do more to protect them, predictions of "very poor harvests for a min of 3 YEARS were guaranteed, so part of the "Compromise" also changed some Turkey rules, based on these very concerns! 

NOW for the FACTS: (which also prove once again, trained wildlife biolgists KNOW what they're doing, and for others to "second guess" them, in the end regardless of sincere intentions is still 'guessing")

Looks like a record with 28,719 birds being registered.....

So much for the "declining flock"...

Looks like that great flock decimator - the crossbow - accounted for a grand total of 11 birds..

Hmm, a record harvest, and the crossbow REALLY harmed them so badly!! 

THAT is why, in the end, we the majority of hunters WILL win, no matter the opinions, or the spin, in the end, HARD DATA, AND FACTS, will actually PROVE which side is correct, and it's not those who oppose sharing with other hunters either!


----------



## aceoky

The proof

(pay attention anti-expansion side; proof backs up claims, and actually means something to most)


1. 2006 = 28719* *23 day season, Saturday opener

2. 2002 = 28120* *weekday opener 

3. 2003 = 27550*

4. 2004 = 26405*

5. 2005 = 25723*


6. 2001 = 23197

7. 2000 = 18243

Funny, with a "declining flock", we in Ky manged to kill a record number of turkey! Even more "strange" is the crossbow "touted" as the destroyer of the flocks if expanded was a "non-issue"......


----------



## Free Range

What are you trying to prove now, what we already know. I can’t think of any weapon that would destroy the resource. I have faith in our DNR’s across the country, that they will not let that happen. I don’t happen to agree with those that say the x-bow will cause harm to the herds and flocks, they have their opinion and I respect their caution. But I believe no matter what weapon is allowed the DNR will make sure that 1) not enough are used to cause harm, or 2) if it does they will curtail it’s use. 

Looks like by those numbers you have a growing flock in KY, and the numbers might just as will increased again this year without the x-bow. How many were taken by x-bow?


----------



## Free Range

Oops I missed the other post, 11 birds, so if there was no x-bow the majority of hunters (in your mind) 11 would have had to stay home. What is the success rate, lets say 1%, then about 105 hunters would be unhappy and would have stayed home, if of course they didn’t decide to hunt with a shot real bow, or shot gun.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Oops I missed the other post, 11 birds, so if there was no x-bow the majority of hunters (in your mind) 11 would have had to stay home. What is the success rate, lets say 1%, then about 105 hunters would be unhappy and would have stayed home, if of course they didn’t decide to hunt with a shot real bow, or shot gun.



YOU need serious help!

THE point IS......MOST game is killed with guns......period, the other side(that would be your buddies, you're so proud of helping especially with your 70/30 split idea) said we were wrong......the crossbow was SO much like a gun, (not having to draw, you should well remember all of this prior to your permanent vacation from there):cocktail: 

So much like a gun, that it would totaly eliminate our DECREASING turkey flock, and AGAIN, part of this "Compromise" was "losing" one legal bird among other things, THEY were so certian that our flocks were IN THAT MUCH DANGER, 

AND That the KDFWR didn't KNOW what they were doing and didn't "have a clue" ON the actual numbers of birds we have in KY!!

NOW you have just admited that even YOU can see our herd IS growing STILL, as the KDFWR said, the anti-crossbow people called BS on US and the Dept for saying EXACTLY that!!!

Since MOST hunters* Know *it IS no feat to draw on a turkey in a blind, their :"facts" didn't mean squat to most, but because of their honest concerns WE first offered to remove turkeys from the expanded season, and finally allowed a lower bag limit and a few "other changes".......these WERE placed into the "Compromise" btw, and it's there in the Press Release you seemed to like so well Tim......just simply check for yourself!!

FACT is, the turkey flocks are in NO danger just as WE said, THEY tried to USE them to defeat us, and to some extent got some very concerned, NOW the facts again prove who was and IS correct on what exactly IS going on in KY.......


----------



## aceoky

*Free Range*

Just for you in case you missed it.....

It was stated , that those "fighting for the crossbow expansion in Ky, didn't play fair the first time, why it was removed", first there was NO one fighting for it the first time.....so once again PURE BS! 

(notice they NEVER give proof when they make these accusations, just like the UCBK is FULL of Canadians, somehow they know more than the officers of the club??? Ask them for proof, as I've done, they say they "heard it" or some such, yeah that must make it true,and although, that is 100% false, WHY do they mention it, I'm betting EVERY bow club fighting expansion has many NR members???, but I digress.....sorry)

Here IS the proof......

1. Purpose The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) has received numerous requests over the past 5 years to extend the crossbow-hunting season.
Additionally, the KDFWR recognizes a need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large percentage of the state.

In 2002, the KDFWR conducted a hunter survey that was mailed to 13,500 hunters in Kentucky – “What do you think about the use of crossbows during archery season?” 

Using the data from the survey and with the knowledge that an extended crossbow-hunting season would not have a negative impact on the resource, 

WHAT, They (KDFWR), USED DATA and THEN THEY DECIDED to expand, where are those "so called" fighters for expansion NOW?? Simple WE don't exist YET....at this point

KDFWR recently proposed an extension of the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkeys from the historical framework of a 10-day season to running at the same time as archery season (first Saturday in Sept. through the third Monday in Jan.).

OK, let's NOW take note of the facts thus far..........The KDFWR recived numerous requests for over 5 years.......(yeah, this was "sudden" and not asked for by anyone, but at NO time is there anyone "Fighting for This, at this time" as anyone can clearly see; A SURVEY WAS DONE, DATA FROM THAT THE KDFWR decides to expand the season........hmm, NOT what some want us to believe though is it??


A minority of hunters (KDFWR received only 22 written comments in opposition to the season) 

lobbied legislators to terminate the season.

THAT is where everything else, came FROM, the division, the, "sides of the issue", etc.etc.etc. AND exactly what divided some of the State's hunters..........SO, though they "spin" it to try to say it WAS US; the facts clearly show WHO exactly did what, (the minoirty) That is where the UCBK was "born", (although not "just yet", it was to "fight" the strong bow clubs who were trying to "force" their will upon all of us, and NO one was around to "counter that".....MOST hunters would agree, that keeps the "playing field" more level, but some continue to make unfounded accustions on issues they obviously have NO clues about.....including WHAT started this whole mess(proven above)......IT WAS..........

The opposition, (knowing they were the minority in this matter, later proven once again, by the Cornell survey)....

"who lobbied the legislature", to keep this "out", 

and it HAD nothing to do with anything other than a "wording techinicality", at that!!! (found "defeicent",) on a slight possiblity......some may not comprehend what was being done.....(which the opposition contended was misleading in the Posted Agenda of the Dept......it clearly said, it was a "crossbow survey study AND SEASON EXPANSION STUDY".......some thought this didn't explain that the season structure might change!!! ....(hey it worked) BUT it's not what some try to claim, and far from it, as usual, NO facts.....

..... thus they ASKED, for it to be "revisted", by this time there were some willing to fight for the KDFWR, and the job they'd done, when asked, we agreed to help work on the whole thing, and shortly thereafter to try to work on a compromise, for unity's sake......you know the rest of how that went!

So their were NO "sides" prior to the KDFWR, deciding to expand the season based upon DATA, and requests(nothing "new" here, exactly how we got our second ML season , which btw they also fought...as they do everything they don't personally want, no matter the rest of their fellow hunter's wishes.....ever matter


try to make some happy, as we're finding out, that's impossible to do.......

So, I've proven, once again, the "spin" doesn't work, the facts as always dispute it, and the fact is clearly shown, there was NEVER "the first time" this pro-side "which didn't play fairly", the KDFWR done exactly what they're supposed to do, and have done many, many, many, times this time, a "few" with the help of lawyers NO doubt, challenged it and delayed, it, THAT is what did the rest, 

SO while they contend it's always been the PRO -side, that caused, the divisions, the facts clearly dispute that claim......thanks for letting me clear that up, as it proves what some will do and say to not admit the blame, rather cast it elsewhere, while the whole time doing much more of the same! 

Or to keep other from trying to enjoy what they love with the archery weapon(s) of their own choosing, some would much rather dictate to others what is allowed,and will if allowed, they'll do exactly that.....

After all in these very type discussions, how often do are we told" they are more than willing to join in , so long as they do it MY way" etc.etc.etc.,


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Just for you in case you missed it.....
> 
> It was stated , that those "fighting for the crossbow expansion in Ky, didn't play fair the first time, why it was removed", first there was NO one fighting for it the first time.....so once again PURE BS!
> 
> (notice they NEVER give proof when they make these accusations, just like the UCBK is FULL of Canadians, somehow they know more than the officers of the club??? Ask them for proof, as I've done, they say they "heard it" or some such, yeah that must make it true,and although, that is 100% false, WHY do they mention it, I'm betting EVERY bow club fighting expansion has many NR members???, but I digress.....sorry)
> 
> Here IS the proof......
> 
> 1. Purpose The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) has received numerous requests over the past 5 years to extend the crossbow-hunting season.
> Additionally, the KDFWR recognizes a need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large percentage of the state.
> 
> In 2002, the KDFWR conducted a hunter survey that was mailed to 13,500 hunters in Kentucky – “What do you think about the use of crossbows during archery season?”
> 
> Using the data from the survey and with the knowledge that an extended crossbow-hunting season would not have a negative impact on the resource,
> 
> WHAT, They (KDFWR), USED DATA and THEN THEY DECIDED to expand, where are those "so called" fighters for expansion NOW?? Simple WE don't exist YET....at this point
> 
> KDFWR recently proposed an extension of the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkeys from the historical framework of a 10-day season to running at the same time as archery season (first Saturday in Sept. through the third Monday in Jan.).
> 
> OK, let's NOW take note of the facts thus far..........The KDFWR recived numerous requests for over 5 years.......(yeah, this was "sudden" and not asked for by anyone, but at NO time is there anyone "Fighting for This, at this time" as anyone can clearly see; A SURVEY WAS DONE, DATA FROM THAT THE KDFWR decides to expand the season........hmm, NOT what some want us to believe though is it??
> 
> 
> A minority of hunters (KDFWR received only 22 written comments in opposition to the season)
> 
> lobbied legislators to terminate the season.
> 
> THAT is where everything else, came FROM, the division, the, "sides of the issue", etc.etc.etc. AND exactly what divided some of the State's hunters..........SO, though they "spin" it to try to say it WAS US; the facts clearly show WHO exactly did what, (the minoirty) That is where the UCBK was "born", (although not "just yet", it was to "fight" the strong bow clubs who were trying to "force" their will upon all of us, and NO one was around to "counter that".....MOST hunters would agree, that keeps the "playing field" more level, but some continue to make unfounded accustions on issues they obviously have NO clues about.....including WHAT started this whole mess(proven above)......IT WAS..........
> 
> The opposition, (knowing they were the minority in this matter, later proven once again, by the Cornell survey)....
> 
> "who lobbied the legislature", to keep this "out",
> 
> and it HAD nothing to do with anything other than a "wording techinicality", at that!!! (found "defeicent",) on a slight possiblity......some may not comprehend what was being done.....(which the opposition contended was misleading in the Posted Agenda of the Dept......it clearly said, it was a "crossbow survey study AND SEASON EXPANSION STUDY".......some thought this didn't explain that the season structure might change!!! ....(hey it worked) BUT it's not what some try to claim, and far from it, as usual, NO facts.....
> 
> ..... thus they ASKED, for it to be "revisted", by this time there were some willing to fight for the KDFWR, and the job they'd done, when asked, we agreed to help work on the whole thing, and shortly thereafter to try to work on a compromise, for unity's sake......you know the rest of how that went!
> 
> So their were NO "sides" prior to the KDFWR, deciding to expand the season based upon DATA, and requests(nothing "new" here, exactly how we got our second ML season , which btw they also fought...as they do everything they don't personally want, no matter the rest of their fellow hunter's wishes.....ever matter
> 
> 
> try to make some happy, as we're finding out, that's impossible to do.......
> 
> So, I've proven, once again, the "spin" doesn't work, the facts as always dispute it, and the fact is clearly shown, there was NEVER "the first time" this pro-side "which didn't play fairly", the KDFWR done exactly what they're supposed to do, and have done many, many, many, times this time, a "few" with the help of lawyers NO doubt, challenged it and delayed, it, THAT is what did the rest,
> 
> SO while they contend it's always been the PRO -side, that caused, the divisions, the facts clearly dispute that claim......thanks for letting me clear that up, as it proves what some will do and say to not admit the blame, rather cast it elsewhere, while the whole time doing much more of the same!
> 
> Or to keep other from trying to enjoy what they love with the archery weapon(s) of their own choosing, some would much rather dictate to others what is allowed,and will if allowed, they'll do exactly that.....
> 
> After all in these very type discussions, how often do are we told" they are more than willing to join in , so long as they do it MY way" etc.etc.etc.,



Can you get us a copy of the results? Were nto really gonna take YOUR word for its outcome. Nothing personal but you are notorious for over looking facts.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Can you get us a copy of the results? Were nto really gonna take YOUR word for its outcome. Nothing personal but you are notorious for over looking facts.


In YOUR opinion that should read......as much as my facts have been "challenged" NO one has EVER proven them incorrect or false....nice try though, I will give you that....

copy of what results exactly ????

You mean the 2002 survey, I've seen the actual results many, many times, they were for full expansion, and that WAS A major part of the reason for the Cornell, study, as FR is very well aware.....THEY (the anti expansion side maintained and accused the KDFWR of "doctoring those results to reflect what they wanted them to say.....)

Thus, the "proof you seek", is in the fact we paid Cornell so much for a SECOND survey, which everyone seems to know by now mirrored the first (2002) survey almost exactly (as I said, there were a couple of very small differences in a couple of numbers, to be expected over a three year period, but NOTHING of real relevence).....fwiw

Marvin, IF you have read the *many times *I posted from the survey summary, IT* clearly * says based upon the *data* from the 2002 survey, soooo do NOT accuse me of "overlooking facts".....unless YOU have some actual factual proof,....... as of now, I have seen NO proof of any claims made by any of YOU three, that means squat, so unlike others, I don't need to "make up things" as I "go along", ALL of the FACTS, DATA, everything is on my side......and most are very much aware of that fact as well.

IF anyone is "notorious" for "overlooking facts", and even trying to "twist and spin" them to fit their own beliefs and opinions........well, it's not I.......:darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> In YOUR opinion that should read......as much as my facts have been "challenged" NO one has EVER proven them incorrect or false....nice try though, I will give you that....



*WRONG!!* 

Another crossbow LIE.

I proved that you were incorrect when you stated that the survey said that more hunters in the woods was the biggest reason hunters opposed crossbows.

I posted the link and quoted your beloved survey WORD FOR WORD as they said the number one reason for hunter opposition was "They do not believe its a bow."

You were proven wrong. Of course this means you have been proven wrong again since you started this post with "NO one has EVER pproven them incorrect ...hrrumph, hrrumph,hrrumph."

You got caught lying yet again. You are a proven spinster and a fraud. Why should we believe anything you purport?

Keep it up though - want to go for the hat trick? LOL.


----------



## aceoky

harvested Opinions About Season Expansions More than one-half of everyone surveyed (especially those from the hunting sample) supports expanding the crossbow season for deer and turkey to make them the same as archery season. 

A minority said they neither support nor oppose the idea and *only about one-fourth oppose the expansion:*

NOW while it's true, the "majority of the minority's wishes, have been challenged, that is HARDLY enough to really consider now is it? 

.* Landowners *were most concerned about the safety of crossbows 

while those from the *hunting sampl*e were most likely to say that the crossbow season should not be the same as archery season because “crossbows are not bows.”

So in order for "he who shant be named" or responded to, since they obviously don't know fact or threats, or lack of had to DECIDE, which of the two to HIS opinion were "Most important"......even to *try* to make a stand against MY facts........JUST as the same poster.....had to USE a TOTALY DIFFERENT question/answer to *try* to prove that bowhunters ONLY were saying that for "those unable to use a conventional bow", which btw HE failed to do,

*I* have easily proven those were TWO SEPERATE QUESTIONS, just as I have easily proven to this poster, ONE group(that fits what HE wants) is the ONE he'll use as "proof" rather than the "overall numbers " taken from ALL THAT OPPOSE EXPANSION(and that is still only less than 1/4...............YET he maintains , or *tries to* that what most of the less than 1/4 thing HELPS his cause)

Yeah, I stand corrected, my data is sound, but a few of the majority of the minoirty, think that crossbows are not bows.........NOTE: they "think" they are NOT.......not they can prove it....

I'm so "busted"........how do I live with myself......over 3/4, DON"T agree...........even IF the *whole* other 1/4 said what this poster was saying(which is FAR from accurate, HOW does that change MY facts.....it does NOT......period....


Thus , *I* stand by MY statement.....100% :cocktail: :darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

Whoops ...

He who is a dum dum must not understand the concept of "opposes"

What you keep saying is "most bowhunters are *opposed *to crossbows because they must share the woods, blah, blah, blah."

Read it again. And again. and again.

OPPOSED.

The survey clearly states that "those from the hunting sample (who are opposed to expansion, remember) were most likely to say that the crossbow season should not be the same as archery season because “crossbows are not bows.”"

That is why they are OPPOSED.

Your facts have proven wrong. Which means 2 of your facts have been proven wrong (including your "fact" that you have never been proved wrong ). Which means your credibility is sinking like the Titanic, post Iceberg....LOL.


----------



## aceoky

: Let me say this ONE more time........

"ONLY LESS THAN 1/4 OPPOSED expansion......"


PERIOD.......

PROVE THAT is wrong IF YOU can........otherwise......none of my facts have been proven wrong.........YOU don't understand what is a majority(expansion) and what is a minority, he who doesnt' know EVEN what a "threat is"......get a life,.........I have nothing to say to you.....accuse ME of a lie after accusing me of an unfounded threat, ..........

LESS THAN 1/4 OPPOSED this.....get it "dum dum"( to use your special wording).......NO one cares what even half of 1/4 think(that would be a GRAND TOTAL OF 1/8 BTW).......

GET over yourself MY facts stand, you got banned, deal with both........or don't.......I really don't care......

I'm still waiting on the "leading part"......

*"roughly six out of ten supported expanding crossbow season. "*

DEAL WITH THAT......... = relevence, NOT what the "majority of a mere less than 1/4 said"..........not relevent, and THEY couldn't even agree why they didn't want it........


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> : Let me say this ONE more time........
> 
> "ONLY LESS THAN 1/4 OPPOSED expansion......"


But since they are the ones who are OPPOSED, it is only their opinion that matters.

They are opposed because crossbows are not bows, and not because(as you _claim_) they do not want to share the woods.

You are simply WRONG here. Cowboy up and admit it, or look like the total partisan and spinster that I know you are.


----------



## aceoky

From the Cornell survey done for KY:

For those who opposed the crossbow season expansion to run at the same time as archery season – whether for deer or turkey – were asked if they would favor other possible expansions.

Even with three other options presented, more than eight out of ten (83% or 79 out of 360 surveyed)

NOT "screwy math" THAT IS 83% OF THOSE 79 BTW

landowners and two-thirds (68% or 650 out of 3240 surveyed) of those from the hunting sample who did not like the ideas of expanding crossbow season to run concurrent with archery season, still favored keeping crossbow season the same (November 28 through December).

IN Other Words, REASON means nothing!

Those who said they still opposed any crossbow season expansion, even after being given several other options to choose from, were asked the primary reason for their opposition. The reasons provided were somewhat different for landowners and hunters. 

Hunters were most likely to say that crossbows are not bows *(35% vs. 7% landowners). *

THAT IS 35% OF A GRAND TOTAL OF 650 BTW OF A "REAL TOTAL" OF 3600.....YEP , I was so wrong LMAO 

SO, 35% of LESS THAN 1/4........."say that crossbows are not bows"....big deal, where is their PROOF?? I won't embarass you with how that computes to actual numbers but I have just taken out the landowners and their LEADING reason "%" just to show YOU how stupid what you're trying to convince anyone of what YOU have "proven" IS......however, thier OPINIONS matter JUST as much......in this survey........EVEN without them.......YOU have "diddly squat"........when one includes them and their LEADING reason (which was unsafe......how about YOU prove that one???? SEE? those OPPOSED don't have "a clue" NOR do they even come close to agreeing...........funny such a small number have SO many reasons to "oppose", a bit of education with facts and YOU and your clan are going to see what is "what".......period

*The leading reason given by landowners *was that crossbows are unsafe (24% vs. 12% hunters).

Additional reasons cited by about one out of ten or more were not wanting crossbow hunters in the woods with them (20% landowners, 15% hunters) and the concern that it will increase poaching (9% landowners, 8% hunters). (See Chart 9) .


NOW YOU "cowboy up"......you are so "off base"......it's NOT even funny......

AND this IS the last time I answer YOU at all....

.....so enjoy this one last ....response......which PROVES YOU have NOTHING to add......but instead, wish to only argue, and when that didn't work to your satisfaction accused me of "threatening you"(unfounded) as usual YOU bring things upon yourself.......learn to deal with that......and BTW , you have called me a 'liar" several times, which is not ONLY unfounded, IS against the stated rules........next time YOU may wish to "re-think" your strategy"..........

The ONLY thing that YOU may have possibly proven, IS that of those whom YOU picked "to matter"......NOT the "*leading reason*" some of the majority OF the minority said "they didnt' think" that crossbows were bow.......big deal, want a "party"? Here then....:cocktail: :darkbeer: 

THAT is the best you'll get from me, again deal with it....talk about a "sore loser"......I mean REALLY!


----------



## aceoky

Bottom line.........MOST IN KY.....want full expansion to run EXACTLY with archery season........WE fought for them(and *I* have never even shot one in my life, ever).......

THEY want to "spin" WE are the cause of division.....WE are the ones fighitng "for justice" and the "will of the majority of the hunters in KY"

WE are NOT he ones who started this "fight", the anti-expansion "bow clubs" ARE THE GUILTY parties.....and I have PROVEN that without any doubts or questions......

SO they "think" that calling stupid things into question.......will somehow change the facts.....and YOU (other members) will forget the facts and belieive(buy) their "spin"......I however give each of YOU more credit than they seem to......

FACT : the KDFWR after recieving numerous requests , decided to expand the crossbow season; AFTER spending over FIVE YEARS , with wildlife bilogists studying the possible effect/affects of doing so.........

THEN a few "bow clubs" decided to hell with what others want WE won't stand for this( one actually admitted several times they ONLY exist to try to keep crossbows out of THEIR season!)

FACT: THEY claim they can prove a "dozen Canadian members"....and they also claim that Canadians were a "majoirty of our membership"........FACT it takes a min of 25 members to vote in the LKS so unless 12 is in fact a majority of 25 (NOT) then they are caught in thier "spin" and "untruths".........simple as that.........

HAD they known of which they speak, AS THEY CLAIM SO OFTEN, they would have KNOWN why, I have been "playing" with them, on their "facts" OBVIOUSLY, they are so full of themselves among other things, truth and facts are NOT relevent to these individuals......

FACT their "beloved" P&Y club accepts, at least as far as I can tell from what I posted form their own site(with link)....Russians, and members from China I'd guess.......since residency IS NOT mentioned ONCE......ever...

...yet THEY want to accuse the UCBK(unfounded and NEVER proven) of having an imaginary Canandian majority........even after I tell them many times they're wrong to "drop it".......they persist but offer NO proof........and even IF they had it (they don't because it' s a lie).....it wouldn't matter because again thier "beloved P&Y club does NOT care about residency at all, one bit nadda)......SEE the hypocrisy they have and boast about???

FACT: allowing the crossbow does NOT "lose", anyone anything , THEY can still hunt as they always have AND THEY KNOW IT.........THEY want to try to convine anyone things are "dilluted " and "polluted" to allow other hunters to join them!!!

They want it ALL to themselves, UNLESS YOU do it THIER WAY........THEN it doesn't matter to them ONE BIT , how "good YOU shoot" ONLY you're doing it 'THEIR WAY'......THAT MATTERS MORE THAN YOUR OWN ABILITY WITH A BOW.... 

AND they "proclaim loudly" they ARE "looking out for bowhunting", and "trying to keep it pure".......I have to ask.......IF they are serious(which I have to question after some of the absurd claims I keep hearing after a year and a half, or more)

HOW is it, in the "best interest" of "bowhunting" to blindly accept users of say a recurve OVER those of a crossbow, let's say for example THEY BOTH practice the exact same amount of time.........WHICH is more likely to "help" bowhunting??????

SEE.......??

Simple really, as Forrest says (and doc)......stupid is as stupid does............

UNITE hunters...........please......."get real"........and realize who the REAL ENEMIES ARE.........PLEASE.....

Hint: it IS NOT other hunters.........even those using a crossbow.........


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> From the Cornell survey done for KY:
> Those who said they still opposed any crossbow season expansion, even after being given several other options to choose from, were asked the primary reason for their opposition. The reasons provided were somewhat different for landowners and hunters.
> 
> Hunters were most likely to say that crossbows are not bows *(35% vs. 7% landowners). *
> 
> THAT IS 35% OF A GRAND TOTAL OF 650 BTW OF A "REAL TOTAL" OF 3600.....YEP , I was so wrong LMAO
> 
> SO, 35% of LESS THAN 1/4........."say that crossbows are not bows"....big deal, where is their PROOF?? I won't embarass you with how that computes to actual numbers but I have just taken out the landowners and their LEADING reason "%" just to show YOU how stupid what you're trying to convince anyone of what YOU have "proven" IS......however, thier OPINIONS matter JUST as much......in this survey........EVEN without them.......YOU have "diddly squat"........when one includes them and their LEADING reason (which was unsafe......how about YOU prove that one???? SEE? those OPPOSED don't have "a clue" NOR do they even come close to agreeing...........funny such a small number have SO many reasons to "oppose", a bit of education with facts and YOU and your clan are going to see what is "what".......period
> 
> *The leading reason given by landowners *was that crossbows are unsafe (24% vs. 12% hunters).
> 
> Additional reasons cited by about one out of ten or more were not wanting crossbow hunters in the woods with them (20% landowners, 15% hunters) and the concern that it will increase poaching (9% landowners, 8% hunters). (See Chart 9) .


I have no idea what you are even talking abiout here .... you are all over the place (some might say irrational.)

Your illucid ramblings don't change the facts.

You have said (repeatedly, over and over, ad nauseum) that bowhunters oppose crossbows primarily because they do not want to share the woods.

Here is a survey from Cornell University (which you define as irrefutable, reputation is above reproach, blah blah, blah) that STATES what the primary opposition to crossbows is from the hunters point of view.

They are NOT bows.

Its simple. You can try to complicate and camoflauge it all you want (that is the definition of spin, by the way) but it does not change the fact.

You spend much of your time here at AT whining and crying that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Be a man and take your lumps.

If the Cornell survey proves that a majority of those surveyed wanted stringgun expansion, than it also proved that most hunters who oppose crossbow expansion do so because they do not believe a crossbow is a bow.

You simply look more and more foolish each time to try to refute what is in black and white for everyone to read.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> WE fought for them(and *I* have never even shot one in my life, ever).............


Then HOW, exactly, do you have a basis for your opinions that they are like compounds? 



aceoky said:


> FACT: THEY claim they can prove a "dozen Canadian members"....and they also claim that Canadians were a "majoirty of our membership"........FACT it takes a min of 25 members to vote in the LKS so unless 12 is in fact a majority of 25 (NOT) then they are caught in thier "spin" and "untruths".........simple as that......


*TRUTH*: If we accept your admission of 12 canadians and add Willie, from Indiana, we indeed have a majority. The claim actually was that non-residents and canadians made up the majority required to vote. Marvin has provided even more NR's that further strenghtens the case. Your admission has indeed validated the claim - thanks.



aceoky said:


> FACT their "beloved" P&Y club accepts, at least as far as I can tell from what I posted form their own site(with link)....Russians, and members from China I'd guess.......since residency IS NOT mentioned ONCE......ever.........


*TRUTH:* P&Y is an INTERNATIONAL club that does, indeed, have acceptance criteria. You must kill a North American Big Game animal (in accordance with the Rules of Fair Chase, of course) to become a member of P&Y. I didn't see that criteria for UCBK, that your canadian members must have killed a KY big game animal...LOL.



aceoky said:


> FACT: allowing the crossbow does NOT "lose", anyone anything , THEY can still hunt as they always have AND THEY KNOW IT..................


*TRUTH:* They lose the bowseason that they have always known, where only true bowhunters have been allowed. 



aceoky said:


> UNITE hunters...........please......."get real"........and realize who the REAL ENEMIES ARE.........PLEASE.....
> 
> Hint: it IS NOT other hunters.........even those using a crossbow.........


Newsflash. YOU are the real enemy of bowhunting, and any other who tries to force crossbows into bowseason....CROSSBOWS are the number one threat to bowhunting, according to P&Y and NABC.


----------



## cynic

http://members.aol.com/TradBowMD/assoc.htm
Pope and Young Club (P&Y) 
Address: Box 548 Chatfield, MN 55923 
Began on *1957 *as part of NFAA's Hunting Activities Committee. Established January 27, *1961*. Glenn St. Charles was elected temporary chairman along with a national advisory board which included *Fred Bear, Bob Lee, and Ben Pearson, among others. **Became incorporated as a non-profit organization on June 5, 1963.* 
Formed as a repository, a way of recording bowhunting successes, as an indicator that bows were not toys and could used effectively to harvest large animals. 
Established the Bowhunting Big Game Records of North America and the Rules of Fair Chase that all animals recorded must be taken by. 
See TB Magazine, Jun/Jul 1995, pp. 61-64. 
http://www.pope-young.org 
See also the Pope & Young Museum. 

This is about the invention of the *compound bow*

The archer's bow has been used for millenia. During its long history, there was little substantive change to the physics of its operation, before the patent awarded to H. Wilbur Allen in *1969* (U. S. Patent No. 3,486,495). As compared to the ``compound bow'' invented by Allen, all early bow types could be reasonably approximated by Hooke's law. For the compound bow, however, restoring force and ``draw'' (string displacement from equilibrium) are far from being proportional to one another. 
http://physics.mercer.edu/petepag/combow.html

At the conception of P&Y there were no COMPOUND BOWS. P&Y did not allow there use until they became popular in the mid-70's. They even apposed there use until it was apparent that they were losing ground in the community. But with a board including Fred Bear,Ben Pearson it was in there best interest since both were leaders in the compound revolution. So they got on the wagon and allowed them up to 65%. Well time marched on let-off increase and now they accept any let-off. P&Y has changed to suit there needs and continue membership but is still declining.
You guys need to pull your skirts back up and realize that most of you couldn't cut it as real archers taking game on the original basis of P&Y. IMO if P&Y had a board member that developed the xbow, xbows would already be legal in archery but as it stands it will have no benefit to them and will only serve to futher the declining membership. So why are they really fighting the xbow, my guess LOSS of REVENUE 

This article addresses the fact that P&Y does not consider the xbow as archery but does not mean that it is not archery equipment
http://www.archerytrade.org/downloads/ataaction07-05.pdf


----------



## thesource

cynic said:


> This article addresses the fact that P&Y does not consider the xbow as archery but does not mean that it is not archery equipment
> http://www.archerytrade.org/downloads/ataaction07-05.pdf


Since this thread is about KY, let's see what they have to say about it:

We all KNOW that KY allows crossbows in archery season, but how do they define "Archery Equipment"?

_Archery equipment: a long bow, recurve bow or compound bow incapable of holding an arrow at full or partial draw without aid from the archer._ 

Guess what's missing? LOL


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Since this thread is about KY, let's see what they have to say about it:
> 
> We all KNOW that KY allows crossbows in archery season, but how do they define "Archery Equipment"?
> 
> _Archery equipment: a long bow, recurve bow or compound bow incapable of holding an arrow at full or partial draw without aid from the archer._
> 
> Guess what's missing? LOL


what is missing from your 1800 posts is a rational argument about your obession with what other archers use in a recreational activity source


----------



## cynic

So I would say that by allowing them in archery season, that would be some insight as to what they really are for those that have insight


----------



## Free Range

> You guys need to pull your skirts back up and realize that most of you couldn't cut it as real archers taking game on the original basis of P&Y. IMO if P&Y had a board member that developed the xbow, xbows would already be legal in archery but as it stands it will have no benefit to them and will only serve to futher the declining membership. So why are they really fighting the xbow, my guess LOSS of REVENUE


You have no idea what I hunt with or how I choose to hunt. And as for the rest of your last post. Do you really expect any organization to remain static? If changing to more closely represent what they think the membership wants is a bad thing, then you have to condemn the AFA, NFAA, and all the states that have changed their hunting regs to allow the x-bow in archery season. 

The P&Y club has made a couple changes, the most notable is the let off restriction. I didn’t like it, but it’s not hard to understand why they did, most compounds being sold have >65% let off. Now you try to make this change look as if they are struggling to remain relevant, nice try. Is AFA struggling to remain relevant because they have broaden their scope to include the x-bow?


----------



## cynic

Free Range said:


> You have no idea what I hunt with or how I choose to hunt. And as for the rest of your last post. Do you really expect any organization to remain static? If changing to more closely represent what they think the membership wants is a bad thing, then you have to condemn the AFA, NFAA, and all the states that have changed their hunting regs to allow the x-bow in archery season.
> 
> The P&Y club has made a couple changes, the most notable is the let off restriction. I didn’t like it, but it’s not hard to understand why they did, most compounds being sold have >65% let off. Now you try to make this change look as if they are struggling to remain relevant, nice try. Is AFA struggling to remain relevant because they have broaden their scope to include the x-bow?


No the most noteable change is the inclusion of the mechanical compound..They still sell recurves but not many still hunt with them since there is a much easier way...and I said "most" not "all"..So if you feel that is an attack on you there must be a concience problem somewhere


----------



## thesource

cynic said:


> So I would say that by allowing them in archery season, that would be some insight as to what they really are for those that have insight


OR - it could be, in spite of the fact that they do not define them as archery equipment, they chose to corrupt bowseason with a non-archery tool (most likely for the money associated with more stamps sold).

If you look at the definition above, it seems the latter theory is more realistic.


----------



## Marvin

Hey Ace, I been doing some how work and I have to ask the question. Who Specifically started the UCBK( names no some spout of topic useless answer that is oh so common)? It looks like WILLIE had a MAJOR part in it by his solicitations. Nobody from Kentucky seemed to have a hand in starting it...go figure. :embara: also found your second survey on my own.....Interesting results and there is egg on your face....again....


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> OR - it could be, in spite of the fact that they do not define them as archery equipment, they chose to corrupt bowseason with a non-archery tool (most likely for the money associated with more stamps sold).
> 
> If you look at the definition above, it seems the latter theory is more realistic.


Or they could be smarter than some that still can't see it...go figure


----------



## thesource

LOL.

You are the one that took semantics to their absolute limit by claiming that a $35 fee was an additional requiremnet to be admitted in Pope and Young.

Now you will argue against KY regulations that, in black and white, spell out the definition of archery equipment?

Talk about a waffler. It is what it is dude. And your beloved stringgun is OUT. There is not 2 sides to this coin.:darkbeer:


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> You are the one that took semantics to their absolute limit by claiming that a $35 fee was an additional requiremnet to be admitted in Pope and Young.
> 
> Now you will argue against KY regulations that, in black and white, spell out the definition of archery equipment?
> 
> Talk about a waffler. It is what it is dude. And your beloved stringgun is OUT. There is not 2 sides to this coin.:darkbeer:


Your reaching again but I still added another post to your count total good job. Funny thing that even spelled out the xbow is in..If you yourself can go on semantics then so can I.. This is what several have tried to enlighten you that if it is good for 1 side it is good for both..now I know you are probably about to blow a gasket waiting on someone to post so you can get another number on the ticker...Jim jones makes grape juice for people like you


----------



## thesource

LOL.

Besides personal attacks (which are against the rules, by the way) do you have anything to offer? :no:


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Hey Ace, I been doing some how work and I have to ask the question. Who Specifically started the UCBK( names no some spout of topic useless answer that is oh so common)? It looks like WILLIE had a MAJOR part in it by his solicitations. Nobody from Kentucky seemed to have a hand in starting it...go figure. :embara: also found your second survey on my own.....Interesting results and there is egg on your face....again....


NICE accusation, (again with NO proof, fwiw)....but I have *no* "egg on my face".......and IF you indeed found it, then you KNOW, the results were in favor of FULL EXPANSION, by the vast majority.....period....

I have already said that Wilie, played an important part in many factors, I ALSO stated, (and can easily prove) that it WAS started by a KY resident'..........it's not such a secret, not at all........I also failed to see those Canadians, in any of those posts........nowhere near what was claimed.......fwiw.........not even close!! As I said, I KNOW better! I also said, it really doesn't matter even if you guys were correct(you're not)........WE had the numbers for the vote.......THAT was all that mattered! (though again your accusations are not correct, even had they been, it makes no difference!)

AS for the KY regs.........they WERE changed(by amendment,(something NOT allowed to be done on a Ky Stautute btw only one reason why SB 211 was such a "bad idea" for KY hunters fwiw)...... the first go around......then changed back , when the full expansion did NOT take place....so much for that "fact".....They WILL change again, and rather soon, so again , so much for "that".....

Well, I don't know FR........I happen to have seen a copy of some letters sent by so many "bow clubs", to the ATA stating their "concern" over the ATA, adding crossbows, how did that work for you guys? :wink: 


Anyone who thinks the majority of ANY hunters considers P&Y the "final say" in any matter is only fooling themselves, a few may, but most really don't care about thier "book", much less anything else, again, when one considers the numbers of hunters and compares them to the membership of the club........it's very easy to comprehend........also there are too many "book bucks" taken and not submitted which also prove, THEY are NOT "it", to most......some perhaps, just not most


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NICE accusation, (again with NO proof, fwiw)....but I have *no* "egg on my face".......and IF you indeed found it, then you KNOW, the results were in favor of FULL EXPANSION, by the vast majority.....period....
> 
> I have already said that Wilie, played an important part in many factors, I ALSO stated, (and can easily prove) that it WAS started by a KY resident'..........it's not such a secret, not at all........I also failed to see those Canadians, in any of those posts........nowhere near what was claimed.......fwiw.........not even close!! As I said, I KNOW better! I also said, it really doesn't matter even if you guys were correct(you're not)........WE had the numbers for the vote.......THAT was all that mattered! (though again your accusations are not correct, even had they been, it makes no difference!)
> 
> AS for the KY regs.........they WERE changed(by amendment,(something NOT allowed to be done on a Ky Stautute btw only one reason why SB 211 was such a "bad idea" for KY hunters fwiw)...... the first go around......then changed back , when the full expansion did NOT take place....so much for that "fact".....They WILL change again, and rather soon, so again , so much for "that".....
> 
> Well, I don't know FR........I happen to have seen a copy of some letters sent by so many "bow clubs", to the ATA stating their "concern" over the ATA, adding crossbows, how did that work for you guys? :wink:
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the majority of ANY hunters considers P&Y the "final say" in any matter is only fooling themselves, a few may, but most really don't care about thier "book", much less anything else, again, when one considers the numbers of hunters and compares them to the membership of the club........it's very easy to comprehend........also there are too many "book bucks" taken and not submitted which also prove, THEY are NOT "it", to most......some perhaps, just not most



4000 respondants are a majority in kentucky Now. THAT IS TRULY FUNNY RIGHT THERE. I can find 4000 people to say a crossbow is not a bow. You gonna believe them if I find them?


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NICE accusation, (again with NO proof, fwiw)....but I have *no* "egg on my face".......and IF you indeed found it, then you KNOW, the results were in favor of FULL EXPANSION, by the vast majority.....period....
> 
> I have already said that Wilie, played an important part in many factors, I ALSO stated, (and can easily prove) that it WAS started by a KY resident'..........it's not such a secret, not at all........I also failed to see those Canadians, in any of those posts........nowhere near what was claimed.......fwiw.........not even close!! As I said, I KNOW better! I also said, it really doesn't matter even if you guys were correct(you're not)........WE had the numbers for the vote.......THAT was all that mattered! (though again your accusations are not correct, even had they been, it makes no difference!)
> 
> AS for the KY regs.........they WERE changed(by amendment,(something NOT allowed to be done on a Ky Stautute btw only one reason why SB 211 was such a "bad idea" for KY hunters fwiw)...... the first go around......then changed back , when the full expansion did NOT take place....so much for that "fact".....They WILL change again, and rather soon, so again , so much for "that".....
> 
> Well, I don't know FR........I happen to have seen a copy of some letters sent by so many "bow clubs", to the ATA stating their "concern" over the ATA, adding crossbows, how did that work for you guys? :wink:
> 
> 
> Anyone who thinks the majority of ANY hunters considers P&Y the "final say" in any matter is only fooling themselves, a few may, but most really don't care about thier "book", much less anything else, again, when one considers the numbers of hunters and compares them to the membership of the club........it's very easy to comprehend........also there are too many "book bucks" taken and not submitted which also prove, THEY are NOT "it", to most......some perhaps, just not most



No proof?? how come NOBODY FROM KENTUCKY was out whoring up votes from out of staters? it was just willie....


----------



## Free Range

> Anyone who thinks the majority of ANY hunters considers P&Y the "final say" in any matter is only fooling themselves, a few may, but most really don't care about thier "book", much less anything else, again, when one considers the numbers of hunters and compares them to the membership of the club........it's very easy to comprehend........also there are too many "book bucks" taken and not submitted which also prove, THEY are NOT "it", to most......some perhaps, just not most


Well, Ace, or is that Mr. Survey, where is your proof? You like surveys so much, I have a poll/survey if you will, done right here on AT that proves Most consider the P&Y club in a positive manner. And if not them then who do you suggest represent bowhunters on the national stage, UCBK, ATA, IBO, NFAA, FITA?? How about the B&C or SCI? Who do you offer up as the National organization that will serve bow hunters better? 



> Well, I don't know FR........I happen to have seen a copy of some letters sent by so many "bow clubs", to the ATA stating their "concern" over the ATA, adding crossbows, how did that work for you guys?


What is it you don’t know Ace? It worked great, they know how we “bowhunters” feel, which is all that is needed, time will tell if it has an affect or not.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin, 4,000 may not be a "majority" of hunters but they were ALL hunters (many were bowhunters fwiw), AND THEY AGREED BY A VAST MAJORITY, FOR EXPANSION, dispute that IF you can......with some actual FACTS.....

They ALL had bought deer or turkey tags.........this since the majority of those asked, were for, (and then the Cornell survey backed that up), anyone can see who has "egg on thier face", and it's not me.......

NOW IF YOU want to pay for them to survey ALL of Ky hunters AND compute the results, send the KDFWR the $$$ I have little doubt they'd be very happy to do that.......

THAT is the problem, with your(and a few other's) "spin", TWO seperate surveys done years apart said the same exact thing......!!!!

FR what " I don't know", IS: did the ATA, "bow down' to those "bow clubs" (including the "elite" one???) Didn't think so........

"Consider in a postive way", is a FAR CRY from what I said.......btw.......AND proves nothing in how many are actual dues paying members.......

FACT IS: MOST hunters do NOT belong to ANY clubs or orgs or groups(save perhaps the NRA).........so NONE of them speak for the "masses" of REAL hunters, bow or otherwise........most know this fact:......

What is so amazing to me; is how many such "elite" groups are SO concerned about what other hunters use during any season, much less why the felt the need to go and fight against hunters in other states who the majority are NOT even members in thier "club"......not to mention some individuals who did the same exact thing.......

I must suspect, that what I seen happen in KY must be happening in other states as well, and I have to ask, 

IS that "good for any of us"??? In the "long run", do WE as a group want OTHERS to help decide what happens in OUR states??????? I don't think so.....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin, 4,000 may not be a "majority" of hunters but they were ALL hunters (many were bowhunters fwiw), AND THEY AGREED BY A VAST MAJORITY, FOR EXPANSION, dispute that IF you can......with some actual FACTS.....
> 
> They ALL had bought deer or turkey tags.........this since the majority of those asked, were for, (and then the Cornell survey backed that up), anyone can see who has "egg on thier face", and it's not me.......
> 
> NOW IF YOU want to pay for them to survey ALL of Ky hunters AND compute the results, send the KDFWR the $$$ I have little doubt they'd be very happy to do that.......
> 
> THAT is the problem, with your(and a few other's) "spin", TWO seperate surveys done years apart said the same exact thing......!!!!
> 
> FR what " I don't know", IS: did the ATA, "bow down' to those "bow clubs" (including the "elite" one???) Didn't think so........
> 
> "Consider in a postive way", is a FAR CRY from what I said.......btw.......AND proves nothing in how many are actual dues paying members.......
> 
> FACT IS: MOST hunters do NOT belong to ANY clubs or orgs or groups(save perhaps the NRA).........so NONE of them speak for the "masses" of REAL hunters, bow or otherwise........most know this fact:......
> 
> What is so amazing to me; is how many such "elite" groups are SO concerned about what other hunters use during any season, much less why the felt the need to go and fight against hunters in other states who the majority are NOT even members in thier "club"......not to mention some individuals who did the same exact thing.......
> 
> I must suspect, that what I seen happen in KY must be happening in other states as well, and I have to ask,
> 
> IS that "good for any of us"??? In the "long run", do WE as a group want OTHERS to help decide what happens in OUR states??????? I don't think so.....



i don;t care what you do but I do care how you cheated to do it. That( like you really like to say) seriously jeprodizes hunters rights in the future. If peta gangs up on us like your crossbow onslaught of out of staters did you never know what might happen.


----------



## Marvin

hers your Data first survey not stacked in your favor in any way was it. ask the gun hunters if they want an lazy way out to hunt more.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin, first that is NOT the right data, I don't know where YOU found it(no link was provided either) or who "edited" it, but it's far from what the ACTUAL results were in 2002!
Which btw I did see then.....that isn't even close to what they were then, "nice"

Also, I don't know how to make it any more clear, that I do not intend to argue about any of this, IF you don't agree with me or my views, fine, I don't agree with you, and a couple of others, who seem to have nothing better to do than go around to various states and fight crossbow inclusion as if in your minds, it's a "cancer", most don't agree, in most states, the proof is in how many have chosen inclusion only in the past year! :darkbeer: 

NOW what would be "nice", and very interesting, is to stop trying to make what the "majority of the minority" want an issue, and other trivial matters..... and actually show US some FACTS that support WHY the crossbow should NOT be allowed, yet the compound should be and is......allowed......

NOT how many of the Cornell survey's minority(less than 1/4 fwiw) said " this or that", but the fact the vast majoirty are for full expansion, it's very obvious which is relevent and which is not!

NOW the majority wish for this, some(a few at best) oppose it strongly and vocally, what I haven't seen(and none of us seem to have), is WHY......it should NOT be allowed as the majority of KY hunters want!

BTW, Marvin the GUN hunters(over 90% pay the bills and are the majority) YOUR point? It IS their decision to make, like it or not......


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin, first that is NOT the right data, I don't know where YOU found it(no link was provided either) or who "edited" it, but it's far from what the ACTUAL results were in 2002!
> Which btw I did see then.....that isn't even close to what they were then, "nice"
> 
> Also, I don't know how to make it any more clear, that I do not intend to argue about any of this, IF you don't agree with me or my views, fine, I don't agree with you, and a couple of others, who seem to have nothing better to do than go around to various states and fight crossbow inclusion as if in your minds, it's a "cancer", most don't agree, in most states, the proof is in how many have chosen inclusion only in the past year! :darkbeer:
> 
> NOW what would be "nice", and very interesting, is to stop trying to make what the "majority of the minority" want an issue, and other trivial matters..... and actually show US some FACTS that support WHY the crossbow should NOT be allowed, yet the compound should be and is......allowed......
> 
> NOT how many of the Cornell survey's minority(less than 1/4 fwiw) said " this or that", but the fact the vast majoirty are for full expansion, it's very obvious which is relevent and which is not!
> 
> NOW the majority wish for this, some(a few at best) oppose it strongly and vocally, what I haven't seen(and none of us seem to have), is WHY......it should NOT be allowed as the majority of KY hunters want!
> 
> BTW, Marvin the GUN hunters(over 90% pay the bills and are the majority) YOUR point? It IS their decision to make, like it or not......



I actually copied from a post of Woody Williams ie Willie. he is not going to appreciate you calling him a liar. Your pretty good at making stuff up on the fly.


----------



## aceoky

EVEN when using "that" you posted Marvin, over 61% supported or were "neutral", which hardly suggests that MOST didn't want it......again, no egg here! :darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> I actually copied from a post of Woody Williams ie Willie. he is not going to appreciate you calling him a liar. Your pretty good at making stuff up on the fly.



I didn't (and don't) call anyone anything, I am stating for a FACT, that those are NOT the same survey numbers that I seen personally (from the KDFWR) in 2002!

Now it just may be possible someone gave him a copy that was edited?? I have NO idea, where those came from, and in fact do not care, fact is, they don't match or come close to the actual figures, WE (different clubs orgs and members who have contact with the Dept. on such things, in the year in which it was done)....I have no doubt that Willie didn't post them knowing they were different, than what I'd seen, but you have to admit, enough time has passed that some people just may have "edited" them to suit themselves??? I don't know, and frankly don't care why they differ, the fact is they do.....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> EVEN when using "that" you posted Marvin, over 61% supported or were "neutral", which hardly suggests that MOST didn't want it......again, no egg here! :darkbeer:


I do like how you tally the neutrals on your side. Not smart once again. its not a yes vote pal.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I didn't (and don't) call anyone anything, I am stating for a FACT, that those are NOT the same survey numbers that I seen personally (from the KDFWR) in 2002!
> 
> Now it just may be possible someone gave him a copy that was edited?? I have NO idea, where those came from, and in fact do not care, fact is, they don't match or come close to the actual figures, WE (different clubs orgs and members who have contact with the Dept. on such things, in the year in which it was done)....I have no doubt that Willie didn't post them knowing they were different, than what I'd seen, but you have to admit, enough time has passed that some people just may have "edited" them to suit themselves??? I don't know, and frankly don't care why they differ, the fact is they do.....



Don't know since you won't ever pony up any solid evidence but mainly supply snipits that favor your side which we have proven several times your pretty much useless. If it so wrong then show us the good one. Thsi is yoru chance to step up and be a wellll...man about it. Now your questioning the validity of something you refuse to supply yet you know all. I have no doubt that thsi is going to blow up in your face. What are you so afraid of? You crossbow guys need to get all your stories straight. Firts teh game departments know whats best and now its the gun hunters. make a stand and go with an answer for once.


----------



## Free Range

All hunters strongly or somewhat agree 40.8%
All hunters strongly or somewhat oppose, 28.3

Archery hunters strongly or somewhat agree 36%
Archery hunters strongly or somewhat oppose 37.1%
.
Just goes to show, you that what I said was right, and in fact I was off, in that I said your side had a slight majority. By these numbers it clearly shows the bow hunters were not in favor of this by 1.1%. 



> Now it just may be possible someone gave him a copy that was edited?? I have NO idea, where those came from, and in fact do not care, fact is, they don't match or come close to the actual figures, WE (different clubs orgs and members who have contact with the Dept. on such things, in the year in which it was done)....I have no doubt that Willie didn't post them knowing they were different, than what I'd seen, but you have to admit, enough time has passed that some people just may have "edited" them to suit themselves??? I don't know, and frankly don't care why they differ, the fact is they do.....


Now there is a conspiracy? When we claim the Cornell results might have been slanted, what was it you said? Now the most respected game dept in KY, shows another thing and you want to discredit it? Nice Ace, and we know where you stand, with your brass hauling buddies, when it suites your purpose it’s all hunters. Heck yeah they want in, I would bet over time, after the idea of x-bows in all seasons sinks in, they will gladly accept one season, hunt until the quota is full. 
Now that there is someone with bow hunting’s best interest at heart,,,,not!


----------



## aceoky

Marvin, nice try, once again.......

The HUNTERS of KY asked for several years for expansion the DEPT studied the possible effects and did the 2002 survey, based upon the DATA from that, they then expanded, a minoirty lobbied the Ky legislature, opposing it, the second survey was done......etc.etc.etc.
IT is ALL there for all to see........


NOW on to something that IS relevent in my view(note the date btw)

*05-07-2005,* 08:21 PM 

Originally Posted by gwhilikerz
Maxcam I don't think there is any need for more debate. *The x-bowyers won*, the vertical bowyers cried foul. 

Then, and only then did the word "compromise" come into prominence. 

We all know there are many "negotiations" taking place amonst several groups.

And we all know about what happens when we start with the "Ky Politics". No matter what the final outcome you can be sure there will be hard feelings. 

But I learned long ago that when you invite the politicians into something that isn't supposed to be political everyone loses. 

NOW perhaps everyone can easily see, when "compromise" came into being and when, and why.......period......


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin, nice try, once again.......
> 
> The HUNTERS of KY asked for several years for expansion the DEPT studied the possible effects and did the 2002 survey, based upon the DATA from that, they then expanded, a minoirty lobbied the Ky legislature, opposing it, the second survey was done......etc.etc.etc.
> IT is ALL there for all to see........
> 
> 
> NOW on to something that IS relevent in my view(note the date btw)
> 
> *05-07-2005,* 08:21 PM
> 
> Originally Posted by gwhilikerz
> Maxcam I don't think there is any need for more debate. *The x-bowyers won*, the vertical bowyers cried foul.
> 
> Then, and only then did the word "compromise" come into prominence.
> 
> We all know there are many "negotiations" taking place amonst several groups.
> 
> And we all know about what happens when we start with the "Ky Politics". No matter what the final outcome you can be sure there will be hard feelings.
> 
> But I learned long ago that when you invite the politicians into something that isn't supposed to be political everyone loses.
> 
> NOW perhaps everyone can easily see, when "compromise" came into being and when, and why.......period......


:lie: :blah: :blah: we see through you. Yoru as transparent as water. No wonder NABC says the crossbow is its biggest threat. It is a gun hunter movement for a bigger season. you said so yourself. How many canadians and out of staters wrote in to complain or demand a new season?


----------



## Free Range

> NABC says the crossbow is its biggest threat. It is a gun hunter movement for a bigger season. you said so yourself. How many canadians and out of staters wrote in to complain or demand a new season?


Exactly, so haul your brass over to the gun season and see if you can make things better in that season. 

“IF” the deer population is such a problem, out east, then I would much rather give the gun guys an extra day or two or even a week, if that was needed, and push the start of bow season up a week, or add a week on the end. At least that would be a honest way of giving our gun toting brothers more hunting time, instead of this back door approach, and the veiled attempt to make this look like some grand “more choice” campaign.


----------



## Marvin

Free Range said:


> Exactly, so haul your brass over to the gun season and see if you can make things better in that season.
> 
> “IF” the deer population is such a problem, out east, then I would much rather give the gun guys an extra day or two or even a week, if that was needed, and push the start of bow season up a week, or add a week on the end. At least that would be a honest way of giving our gun toting brothers more hunting time, instead of this back door approach, and the veiled attempt to make this look like some grand “more choice” campaign.


 Yeah Ace Run... Go get your gun hunters...Ypur now going to look like the agresser and I will do my part to ensure that bowhunters in KY know the real plan you have in store for them. You said so yourself that gun season is during teh rut so why not just add another week of gun season. Its not about that is it. maybe there is more at stake in this for you then your letting on. The wheels are turning now.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Exactly, so haul your brass over to the gun season and see if you can make things better in that season.
> 
> “IF” the deer population is such a problem, out east, then I would much rather give the gun guys an extra day or two or even a week, if that was needed, and push the start of bow season up a week, or add a week on the end. At least that would be a honest way of giving our gun toting brothers more hunting time, instead of this back door approach, and the veiled attempt to make this look like some grand “more choice” campaign.


.

EXACLTY why YOU and your "group" have NO reason to "stick your collective noses into things you are not only understanding, but refuse to try to understand"!!!!

AS for "my gun toting brothers."......THEY pay most of the bills here(as IN MOST STATES, so I'd tread lightly, in making them angry, WE all know the archery hunter does NOT kill enough for "mangement purposes", period, SO what you have here IS the proverbial, "nightmare" that YOU just stepped into, upsetting those who DO thier part, in paying the bills AND controlling the herds........WISE MOVE.........and thank you!:darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Yeah Ace Run... Go get your gun hunters...Ypur now going to look like the agresser and I will do my part to ensure that bowhunters in KY know the real plan you have in store for them. You said so yourself that gun season is during teh rut so why not just add another week of gun season. Its not about that is it. maybe there is more at stake in this for you then your letting on. The wheels are turning now.


Please hold your breath till you see ME run OK?  

According to "some" here, I've always been the "aggressor", never was, and this changes nothing fwiw....try as YOU guys might, the ONE single thing asked so many time IS:

SHOW US all........why the crossbow should NOT be allowed for the entire archery season......NOT opinons, on what "is a bow", etc. some ACTUAL facts and data that even suggests it's somehow "bad"......we've waited for over 18 MONTHS........I therefore have to suspect, there is NO GOOD reason for it to be excluded ANYWHERE, during that season, as many of us suspected all along......I'm NOT running.....YOU guys are avoiding the 1 million $ question, however, and I suspect MOST can see that fact.....

I didn't need to say we in Ky hunt the rut with modern gun, it's a well known fact.....get a clue, of WHAT you're talking about, then perhpas WE can actually have an intellgent conversation(goes for FR as well btw)....

AS it is, NONE of you has any clue of what you're trying to say, or how silly it in fact is for Ky........and YOU have each proven that exactly....


----------



## aceoky

BTW Free Range, "Reloaders Haul Brass" IS about hunters "picking up after themselves".....THAT is the "gist" of that slogan......when *I* first started reloading several years ago, an older wiser reloader told me " Reloader have a message for ALL hunters, WE don't leave even empty shell behind........WE pick them, AND eveything else up, as IF we'd never really been there...."

THAT stuck in my head, and to this day, I love those "words of wisdom", WE have all seen SOME do NOT do this......

So once again, nice try, BUT these "personal attacks"(especially when YOU have NO idea, of what YOU'RE speaking of )_ serve NO REAL purpose, please at least TRY to control yourself, it's really NOT getting YOU anywhere, I'd bet big on it.......fwiw

While it's very true, that all the facts and data are on MY side, you certainly should realize by now, that YOU stating YOUR postition, ONLY based on trying to degrade me(how's that worked for you thus far btw), doesn't help YOU in any way........try some actual, factual data, OR drop it......*I* could easily "outdo" YOU on insults, but, this is NOT the time or place for that........

IOW, THAT is exactly what one WOULD expect from ANTI-HUNTERS.................NOT from other hunters.....get a clue, please....


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> .*I* could easily "outdo" YOU on insults, but, this is NOT the time or place for that........
> QUOTE]
> 
> Bring it boy...
> 
> Let's see what Canadatuckian humor sounds like!!!
> 
> LOL.


----------



## Free Range

> By Ace
> While it's very true, that all the facts and data are on MY side,


You keep saying this, but in your thousands of post I have read, I have seen NO data from you that proves the x-bow is good for bow season. This will be the third time this week I have asked you to post real facts, so we can both can get back to debating instead of the crap flying around.
If you want to continue with the attacks that’s fine too, but really it makes you look bad. 



> I* could easily "outdo" YOU on insults, but, this is NOT the time or place for that........


I have no doubt, after all you have so far.


----------



## aceoky

I've shown "tons" of data that proves the crossbow is a great aid in hunter retention and recruitment, most see that as positive for bowhunting,(obviously some do not as they view other hunters presence as "intrusion" rather than inclusion)... as I've shown so much other relevent data, but alas, some would rather argue, and wiss and moan rather than debate with facts, thus since *nothing* even somewhat postive is being gained from any of that, I see no good reason to even attempt to continue, the facts and data are not only there, by now they are well known, some want to try to exclude others, that tactic doesn't in the least help any hunting, bowhunting or otherwise.....perhaps we should all consider ALL other hunters(that includes gun hunters who pay the majority of the bills in most states, thus likely have the bigger say).....since this whole deal has only turned "ugly", personal, and against other groups of hunters.....I can see no good reason for myself to continue, after asking so many times, it seems obvious it's beyond a few to actually debate without "getting personal", I have said, it .....it doesn't help, and I don't intend to go there anymore, since that isn't going to happen(everyone staying "civil", and focused on the facts), I'll leave those "few" to thier own devices, perhaps that will allow for things to be as they should have been all along?? 

Keep letting the gun hunters know how much "better" you think you few are, keep talking badly about them, when they decide as a group to teach you all(and us) a "lesson", stand proud....you've earned it..........later on(but I seriously doubt it)....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I've shown "tons" of data that proves the crossbow is a great aid in hunter retention and recruitment, most see that as positive for bowhunting,(obviously some do not as they view other hunters presence as "intrusion" rather than inclusion)... as I've shown so much other relevent data, but alas, some would rather argue, and wiss and moan rather than debate with facts, thus since *nothing* even somewhat postive is being gained from any of that, I see no good reason to even attempt to continue, the facts and data are not only there, by now they are well known, some want to try to exclude others, that tactic doesn't in the least help any hunting, bowhunting or otherwise.....perhaps we should all consider ALL other hunters(that includes gun hunters who pay the majority of the bills in most states, thus likely have the bigger say).....since this whole deal has only turned "ugly", personal, and against other groups of hunters.....I can see no good reason for myself to continue, after asking so many times, it seems obvious it's beyond a few to actually debate without "getting personal", I have said, it .....it doesn't help, and I don't intend to go there anymore, since that isn't going to happen(everyone staying "civil", and focused on the facts), I'll leave those "few" to thier own devices, perhaps that will allow for things to be as they should have been all along??
> 
> Keep letting the gun hunters know how much "better" you think you few are, keep talking badly about them, when they decide as a group to teach you all(and us) a "lesson", stand proud....you've earned it..........later on(but I seriously doubt it)....



Were is it( all this illustrious data) at then? Oh wait this is the clasic time for the "i've posted it, go find it yourself" ace comments ....How come you run away for a few days then drum up old threads thinking it changes anything anyhow? You cheated and have been caught. You migth asl well bring them on cause your gonna ram them down our throats regardless...We are better than the "gun hunters" ..better bowhunters that is...:cocktail:


----------



## Free Range

Ace, I guess you’re right some would rather not debate with facts. For the forth time if you will just post one of these facts you claim to have we, COULD, debate the facts. But even after I have asked four times, you refuse to provide any facts for your case. 
If that is your wish to not provide those here with the facts supporting x-bow expansion, that’s fine with me, things should become more civil now that you are not going to be here calling us snob, selfish and greedy.


----------



## Free Range

This is mostly copied from a well known x-bow site, I just added my truths to the myths they calim.


X-bow myths and facts.

Myth; X-bows is a poachers tool.

It is claimed by pro-x-bow pushers that the x-bow is not a poachers chosen weapon, my question is how would they know? They claim it is cumbersome to discharge from a vehicle, do all poachers just hunt from their vehicle? They claim where legal, violations are minimal, well if it is the poachers weapon of choice, wouldn’t it stand to reason, it’s because it’s harder to get caught with one? Just a couple questions I thought I would throw out. 

Myth: X-bows are unsafe:

Mostly a made up myth by the pro x-bow camp, most people know it’s the person not the weapon. However there is a inherent unsafe factor with any cocked and locked weapon over one that is not carried “ready to fire” 

Myth; X-bow hunting will squeeze out other hunters:

Not sure how you could call this a myth, when Ohio shows that over 50% of hunters hunting during the archery season carry a x-bow. Anyhow a myth is only a myth if it can be proven false. Our opinion is that it will squeeze out other hunters, only time will tell, I would say that after we have had x-bows in 8-10 states for 20 years with not ill affects could we call this a myth

Myth: X-bow hunting will wipe out the deer herd

Again a made up myth by the pro x-bow camp, most people know the DNR will not let that happen. While there may be some that claim this, most of the pro-bowhunting people know this is not much of a consideration

Myth: The x-bow controversy creates division amongst sportsmen.

Now how could they call this a myth, you only have to visit a few bowhunting websites to see this is true.

Myth: There is an independent study which dramatically shows the superior capability of the x-bow (and its development) over the vertical bow.

There certainly is an independent study. That is like saying that because the KY DNR commissioned the Cornell study it’s not an independent study. Grasping at straws are we? 

Myth: Because it is not hand-drawn and released, the crossbow is more closely compared to a firearm than a vertical bow. 

They forgot to mention shoulder mounted, scoped, and the use of rifle marksmanship skills when squeezing the trigger. Hand drawn is the most basic requirement to fulfill the need of being a bow. If the x-bow cannot even fill this most basic requirement, then it is not a myth at all. More likely the myth should be, “it doesn’t have to be hand drawn and held to be a bow” 

Myth: Nobody wants x-bow hunting except the x-bow mfg’s

Again a made up myth. If they were being truthful in their statements they would have said “not very many actual hunters want it”. For proof of this you only have to look at states that allow the x-bow during gun season, but not during archery season. How many people hunt in those states now? A very small number. The myth should read “there is a large ground swell of hunters that are truly interested in hunting with a x-bow”.

And here is the biggest myth of them all. The x-bow will recruit more hunters making us stronger against the likes of PETA.

Fact there is no evidence that supports this wild claim. In fact all the data show we are still losing hunters at an alarming rate. Even in the states that have allowed the x-bow for years. They try to use this argument because we all know we need to recruit more hunters and it sounds good to say the x-bow will help. The fact is, is does not help, and in fact it may be counter productive. At least one individual has stated on a public forum that they did not hunt this past year in KY because of the x-bow being allowed to expand into more of the archery season.


----------



## aceoky

*Hopeless situation IMHO*

See, that's why I see no good reason to even attempt to continue....you three continue to question my facts, but then have nothing to add to disprove them other than to try to "belittle me", and "attack me personally", knowing full well, these facts are accepted by most bowhunters.....case in point..

*Myth; X-bow hunting will squeeze out other hunters:*
Not sure how you could call this a myth, *when Ohio shows that over 50% of hunters hunting during the archery season carry a x-bow. *Anyhow a myth is only a myth if it can be proven false. Our opinion is that it will squeeze out other hunters, only time will tell, I would say that after we have had x-bows in 8-10 states for 20 years with not ill affects could we call this a myth

First, they're still hunting, thus, that has NO merit at all......secondly there are states having allowed them for over 20 years where they're still the minoirty, facts, yet you three choose to ignore them, and focus on attacks, as always, it's old non-productive and a waste of mine as well as everyone else's time imho

*Myth: The x-bow controversy creates division amongst sportsmen.*

Now how could they call this a myth, you only have to visit a few bowhunting websites to see this is true.

Using that "logic", then the compound bow hunters are even more guilty, remember that "division", the compound was allowed, everything "settled down", and it was after all, much ado about nothing.....again FACTS.....and again, chosen to be ignored....as usual, as for "visit a few site to see it', Ive noticed(and doubt that I'm alone), that there are three individuals who oppose this idea, and they are the ones causing the most of the "division", by continuing to visit those sites and expound their "wisdom", on why so many are so wrong, as we've all seen here.... .

Myth: Nobody wants x-bow hunting except the x-bow mfg’s

Again a made up myth. If they were being truthful in their statements they would have said “not very many actual hunters want it”. 

For proof of this you only have to look at states that allow the x-bow during gun season, but not during archery season. How many people hunt in those states now? A very small number. The myth should read “there is a large ground swell of hunters that are truly interested in hunting with a x-bow”.

Again using this logic since most don't use a longbow during archery season, then there is NO need in them having a season, according to you....

And here is the biggest myth of them all. The x-bow will recruit more hunters making us stronger against the likes of PETA.

Fact there is no evidence that supports this wild claim. In fact all the data show we are still losing hunters at an alarming rate. Even in the states that have allowed the x-bow for years. They try to use this argument because we all know we need to recruit more hunters and it sounds good to say the x-bow will help. The fact is, is does not help, and in fact it may be counter productive. At least one individual has stated on a public forum that they did not hunt this past year in KY because of the x-bow being allowed to expand into more of the archery season.

See, first there is plenty of Data that proves that the crossbow DOES in fact recruit AND retain hunters, using Ohio data, they've compiled it, I know for a fact you have seen it, but still you insist, there is NO factual evidence, when there is more than enough to prove it beyond any doubt ......that is for those who really are interested in facts and truth, not opposing it at all cost......ALSO , it's interesting, that some say, we're losing hunters, there is no need to try to change that??? FACT: the crossbow DOES allow others to hunt in the archery season who can nor OR will not otherwise do so, enough evidence of that fact abounds, IF one bothers to look.....saying it's not there is NOT proof of that, it's everywhere, yet some again refuse to accept the truth

Thus having shown what is "what" even in my own state, three seem to be much "wiser and better informed", than I am, everyone is free to beleive whatever, and whomever they wish, I was in constant contact with both sides of this during the entire thing...I must have some reliable ideas of what did happen and take place.....regardless of the personal attacks and "spin" that has been presented by these three.......

Therefore, I have no reason nor do I care to bother to try to inform others of what did actually take place here, to only be falsely accused, belittled and badgered, for no good reason, they can "have at it", I'm done with this , at least for some time, this has gone beyone "unreal" to me, IF they had the facts, they've had ample opportunity to present them, instead of the "stuff" they have posted.....I stand 100% behind all and everything I said, because it's a fact and very easily verified.....for those who actually are interested in truth and facts and not insults and attacks, to try to cover up the truth.......have a great summer and even better hunting, .......


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> All hunters strongly or somewhat agree 40.8%
> All hunters strongly or somewhat oppose, 28.3
> 
> Archery hunters strongly or somewhat agree 36%
> Archery hunters strongly or somewhat oppose 37.1%
> .
> Just goes to show, you that what I said was right, and in fact I was off, in that I said your side had a slight majority. By these numbers it clearly shows the bow hunters were not in favor of this by 1.1%.
> 
> I hate to break this to you(not really), but IF you had any idea of what % of ALL HUNTERS archery hunters make up, you'd know how foolish you sound right now, just because NOW they get to hunt it, doesn't make it "belong to them alone", ALL hunters pay the bills and in Ky WE don't get ANY "general funds $$), IOW 100% of the funds the Dept has to work with comes from ALL of us!
> 
> 
> 
> Now there is a conspiracy? When we claim the Cornell results might have been slanted, what was it you said? Now the most respected game dept in KY, shows another thing and you want to discredit it? Nice Ace, and we know where you stand, with your brass hauling buddies, when it suites your purpose it’s all hunters. Heck yeah they want in, I would bet over time, after the idea of x-bows in all seasons sinks in, they will gladly accept one season, hunt until the quota is full.
> Now that there is someone with bow hunting’s best interest at heart,,,,not!


Again, your opinion, not even close to reality, but that never changes nor stops you, and just as you were told on the Tenn. forum, your "ideas" are not going to work and are in fact "silly", We now archery hunt from Sep 3-Jan 16.....before or after that is "insane" for ANY season, for what should be obvious reasons to a "bowhunter"...however, WE just may add in some more gun seasons just for "you", since YOU agree they belong there! How's that sound, be very careful, about what you assume and presume......it may come back and "bite you", especially when you're so unaware of the reality of the seasons(which by now I"d hoped you'd checked as promised)...

AS I said, there just is NO good reason to try to attempt, to continue, this thing has gotten so far off track, and full of ----- at this point, it's not worth my efforts....time or energy.....I'll simply walk away, and leave you three to your own devices, as I've seen in the past many times, you guys are very capable of causing yourselves more than enough trouble without my input or posting.....y'all have much fun......

BTW, it is looking very likely the crossbow seaon will be expanded further to include the pre-rut in Ky, ......know you three would be very happy of that news!!:darkbeer: 

If only we'd kept this as I asked many,many times, we could have possibly helped some others make up their own mind, but who is going to do that with all the BS going on? No reason to waste time, bandwith etc. when it's obviously only going to continue to get worse and more personal, even several personal accusations that were never proven nor attempts made to do so......call it running if you want marvin.....btw we're proud to not have you as a member as well......with your "logic" with only be moving backwards rather than foward at a steady pace as we now are doing......appreciate it.......even though it was yet another attempt at a "slam" at our org....one day, perhaps you three will learn, that these tactics don't help you look any better, but many have to question where are YOUR facts....since you seem to love to question every one elses, but never have any of your own to offer up in "rebuttle"......odd isn't it, most don't fall for it, and they notice that fact......

Say we've not shown them, they're there......for all to see in many places one only has to look and pay attention to what IS fact and what is opinion.....we have more than enough facts, you three have several opinions......that's the "long and short" of it....fwiw


----------



## Free Range

Ace are we going to do this in a gentlemanly manner? 

Let me see if I can say this so you can understand, The myth is that the x-bow will recruit and maintain new hunters, notice I didn’t write new BOW hunters. If you look at the data from any state you will see that hunter numbers are dropping. So it is clearly a lie to say the x-bow will strengthen our numbers. The only thing it might do is move hunters from one weapon to another, this is not creating new hunters. If you cannot understand this most simple concept then there is no need to have any further discourse with you , because you are simply beyond understanding. 
If you would like I will post a written response I have from one of the heads of the ODNR stating that the numbers of hunters in Ohio are still declining, as they have for the last 30 or more years. 



> Say we've not shown them, they're there......for all to see in many places one only has to look and pay attention to what IS fact and what is opinion.....we have more than enough facts, you three have several opinions......that's the "long and short" of it....fwiw



This makes what five times I have asked you to show us some facts that back up your claim that the x-bow is “good” for bow season. But as you say, all we get is spin, and attacks with no facts. So if you are done here and don’t want to present any facts then have a nice summer, we will continue to provide facts to those that whish to debate without attacking.


----------



## cynic

Free Range said:


> Ace are we going to do this in a gentlemanly manner?
> 
> Let me see if I can say this so you can understand, *The myth is that the x-bow will recruit and maintain new hunters, notice I didn’t write new BOW hunters*. If you look at the data from any state you will see that hunter numbers are dropping. *So it is clearly a lie to say the x-bow will strengthen our numbers.* *The only thing it might do is move hunters from one weapon to another, this is not creating new hunters*. If you cannot understand this most simple concept then there is no need to have any further discourse with you , because you are simply beyond understanding.
> If you would like I will post a written response I have from one of the heads of the ODNR stating that the numbers of hunters in Ohio are still declining, as they have for the last 30 or more years.
> This makes what five times I have asked you to show us some facts that back up your claim that the x-bow is “good” for bow season. But as you say, all we get is spin, and attacks with no facts. So if you are done here and don’t want to present any facts then have a nice summer, we will continue to provide facts to those that whish to debate without attacking.


If by allowing the choice by even 1 person to use the xbow that does not currently participate in Archery season it is recruiting. If so much as 1 person that hunts with a verticle bow decides to hunt with a xbow and chooses to continue archery hunting it is retaining hunters..While hunter numbers decline, it is by hunter choice not by choice of weapon in Ohio. So again by recruiting new hunters and retaining those that decide for whatever reason that the vertical bow is just not working for them and what they want in their individual hunting experience it is a good thing. You seem to have a fixation on the term *bow season *and what you think *bow* season should be. It is ARCHERY SEASON

Has anyone besides me noticed that dnr does not state "Crossbows allowed in BOW season" but rather "Crossbows allowed in archery season"..


----------



## Free Range

If one person continues to hunt with a bow, instead of switching to a gun, that is a good thing, how? That one person is still a hunter, no matter if they are using a gun or bow. And in the case of most states if that one person is not able to draw a bow they can most likely get a handicapped waiver anyhow. So your point is mute, they could still hunt in archery season if there is some reason they just don’t like hunting enough to make the switch to a gun. 

I do have a fixation on Bow season, it’s those that don’t have a fixation on bow season that we don’t want in bow season. As Source has said many times, the fly by night x-bow shooters that are not dedicated enough to bow season to shoot a bow, are the ones that will probably be most willing to cut and run. I would rather have 10 dedicated bow hunters, then 1000 that just want to grab a x-bow and hunt in “archery” season, when it comes time to defend Bow season.


----------



## cynic

Free Range said:


> If one person continues to hunt with a bow, instead of switching to a gun, that is a good thing, how? That one person is still a hunter, no matter if they are using a gun or bow. And in the case of most states if that one person is not able to draw a bow they can most likely get a handicapped waiver anyhow. So your point is mute, they could still hunt in archery season if there is some reason they just don’t like hunting enough to make the switch to a gun.
> 
> I do have a fixation on Bow season, it’s those that don’t have a fixation on bow season that we don’t want in bow season. As Source has said many times, the fly by night x-bow shooters that are not dedicated enough to bow season to shoot a bow, are the ones that will probably be most willing to cut and run. I would rather have 10 dedicated bow hunters, then 1000 that just want to grab a x-bow and hunt in “archery” season, when it comes time to defend Bow season.


And I guess ya'll have a threesome going on now..I did not say by allowing a handicapped hunter. There is not a provision for stength impaired youths or women. If you are not dedicated enough to hunt with a real bow instead of a whimpy compound you have no room to compare you and yours to anyone, much less think that you are some how better.


----------



## thesource

Your arguement contains no logical reasoning.

What you appear to be saying is :

compounds are cheating, so why not allow crossbows to supercheat.

Not very powerful, there, sport.


----------



## cynic

While you try to justify your cheating. If cheating is cheating and we all are cheating and therefore it is the pot calling the kettle black. If someone lies they are a liar, If someone tells a little white are they not still lying and therefore a liar?


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> Your arguement contains no logical reasoning.
> 
> What you appear to be saying is :
> 
> compounds are cheating, so why not allow crossbows to supercheat.
> 
> Not very powerful, there, sport.


You talking about logic..What a joke


----------



## Jim C

cynic said:


> You talking about logic..What a joke



source's position comes from internal self esteem issues. when you don't hunt according to the church of source, not only are you blaspheming, you are undermining the one pillar that holds up his sense of self worth.

that is why he spends so much time calling people like me (who do more in a month for archery that source has done in his life) lazy-its an attempt to bolster his ego


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Ace are we going to do this in a gentlemanly manner?
> That's "too funny", as often as I've tried to do that for over 16 months now..
> 
> Let me see if I can say this so you can understand, The myth is that the x-bow will recruit and maintain new hunters, notice I didn’t write new BOW hunters.
> SEE that is YOUR problem, you ask, "how is it good for bowhunting" but don't want to accpet that more bowhunters IS "good for bowhunting" thus it's YOU who "is beyond understanding" ..
> 
> 
> If you look at the data from any state you will see that hunter numbers are dropping. So it is clearly a lie to say the x-bow will strengthen our numbers. The only thing it might do is move hunters from one weapon to another, this is not creating new hunters.
> 
> That's "insane"! IF it adds 30% NEW bowhunters, THAT is positive for bowhunting, ONLY those who are so "hardheaded" to try to maintain otherwise, against all of the data, would say such things, as you know I"m working on getting the Tenn data, once I do you will look quite silly......there were several NEW tags sold last year, and we KNOW it's because of the crossbow.....NEW tags = NEW hunters period
> 
> If you cannot understand this most simple concept then there is no need to have any further discourse with you , because you are simply beyond understanding.
> 
> sure it's me beyond understanding.....at least I"M trying to add to our numbers unlike you three, who would rather lose it all, than allow another choice.....this is why there is NO good reason for my continuing this here, and really no point in anyone else imho......YOU three, are doing more to harm bowhunting and hunting in general, than most anyone!!
> If you would like I will post a written response I have from one of the heads of the ODNR stating that the numbers of hunters in Ohio are still declining, as they have for the last 30 or more years.
> 
> That's odd, since bowhunters HAVE increased and as you are so fond of saying over half of Ohio's archery hunters use the crossbow.....hmm......hunters numbers decline, but archery hunters are NOT in Ohio, but the crossbow has over 50% of these, IF you think that helps your arguments against the crossbow you live in a "small dream world".....OHIO, is losing some hunters due to LOSS OF HUNTING GROUND DUE TO DEVELOPEMNT as are many, many states sadly, however that has nothing to do with the crossbow, and the worst part is YOU know it.....you've had it proven more than enough already
> 
> 
> This makes what five times I have asked you to show us some facts that back up your claim that the x-bow is “good” for bow season. But as you say, all we get is spin, and attacks with no facts. So if you are done here and don’t want to present any facts then have a nice summer, we will continue to provide facts to those that whish to debate without attacking.



THAT is the biggest line of BS you've said yet (and that in and of itself is saying quite a lot).......YOU and facts??? Heh....."without attacking"?? Give me a break, and "get real", how many forums are YOU no longer welcome at for attacking ME?? 

You know after almost a year and a half of dealing with you three, and your "attacks", I went " a bit overboard", I'll admit that, but everyone has their "point", and most who have been around know how long it took for me to do so, nice try, but don't even act so innocent, and make like I am the guilty one......too many KNOW the truth on that...!!

Most who know me, know without question it's not my usual manner to do so, but some people seem to only understand what they "toss out there", and must see how it looks, or so I thought, however that didn't change anything...so I regret trying to show you three how "silly" you look using these "tactics"...... 

One other thing YOU said "it's a LIE to say the crossbow is going to strengthen our numbers" due to the drop in hunter numbers nationwide"........prove to anyone that the inclusion of the crossbow has NOT kept that number from being higher(lost hunters).....NO lie, and nothing clear, other than as USUAL YOUR opinion, which you always state as fact......while you question actual facts and data provide, you keep saying you're asking me for this data, I've provided it hundreds of times, YOU refuse to accept it, as do your other two , no matter where the data comes from you three seem to value your own opinions over that of for example the Head wildlife biologist from Georgia!!! 

No point in doing that all over again! After a year and a half, I've learned that some people are so full of themselves they refuse to accept anything they don't already think they know........so be it....

I have no doubt that you three will continue to spew forth your opinions as "wisdom", and all of that, and continue to dispute ALL the data, I can assure you, A.) it's doing more harm than any possible "good".B.) the facts and data will soon overwhelm all three of you....bet on it


----------



## Free Range

> And I guess ya'll have a threesome going on now..I did not say by allowing a handicapped hunter. There is not a provision for stength impaired youths or women. If you are not dedicated enough to hunt with a real bow instead of a whimpy compound you have no room to compare you and yours to anyone, much less think that you are some how better.


Justification. You can’t or won’t use a bow so your only recourse is to bring what others are using down to your level and justify your incompetence. This is about allowing the x-bow to expand into archery season, not about the differing of sameness between the compound and the x-bow. If you want to compare weapons then we must allow the firearm in the debate. There are many firearms that take deer at an average of less then 50 yards. 

You can call the compound wimpy all you want, but you can’t get past the fact one must still hold, draw, and release a compound just like a more traditional bow. So in order to make yourself feel better about taking the back door into archery season you try every effort to denigrate the compound. Using the less common denominator theory to justify doing something that we all know is morally bankrupt. Just as setting the standards in school to the dumbest kid weakens our school system, so would setting the standard of bow hunting to the lowest form of archery.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Justification. You can’t or won’t use a bow so your only recourse is to bring what others are using down to your level and justify your incompetence. This is about allowing the x-bow to expand into archery season, not about the differing of sameness between the compound and the x-bow. If you want to compare weapons then we must allow the firearm in the debate. There are many firearms that take deer at an average of less then 50 yards.
> 
> You can call the compound wimpy all you want, but you can’t get past the fact one must still hold, draw, and release a compound just like a more traditional bow. So in order to make yourself feel better about taking the back door into archery season you try every effort to denigrate the compound. Using the less common denominator theory to justify doing something that we all know is morally bankrupt. Just as setting the standards in school to the dumbest kid weakens our school system, so would setting the standard of bow hunting to the lowest form of archery.



more stupidity-the firearms red herring. every firearm legal to kill deer with in Ohio can easily kill deer at 150 yards

stick to topic and stop trying to cloud the waters with nonsense

You don't hold a compound like a trad bow-and you don't release it like a trad bow in the first case the bow holds most of the weight with a MECHANICAL advantage and pulling trigger is pulling a trigger

As I noted It doesn't hurt you either so stop trying to tell other people they shouldn't hunt when they want to use a type of bow that has no higher harvest rates WHICH AGAIN IS ALL THAT COUNTS in the legal arena


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> As I noted It doesn't hurt you either so stop trying to tell other people they shouldn't hunt when they want to use a type of bow *that has no higher harvest rates WHICH AGAIN IS ALL THAT COUNTS *in the legal arena


So when you used to use this as your favorite stalwart position, you were just ignorant of the facts.

But now, since I have published the VA data showing that crossbows had a harvest rate advantage over vertical bows, your continued use of this position proves you to be dishonest.

Your radical crossbow extremism is making you say things that are just not true, Jim. Its making you look foolish, too.


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> So when you used to use this as your favorite stalwart position, you were just ignorant of the facts.
> 
> But now, since I have published the VA data showing that crossbows had a harvest rate advantage over vertical bows, your continued use of this position proves you to be dishonest.
> 
> Your radical crossbow extremism is making you say things that are just not true, Jim. Its making you look foolish, too.


 Key words there.


----------



## aceoky

FR HERE is your buddies Va data, HE claims these ARE .... nearlyALL new hunters! (he said exactly" other than a few of these that were disabled, they were all new")

Virginia 2005 archery/crossbow deer season
Resident Crossbow - 14,522
Non-Resident Crossbow -525
*15,077* total crossbowers

36% success ratio


Resident Archery - 51,714
Non-Resident Archery - 2,489
54,203 total archers

32% success ratio

So, according to VA data posted by YOUR side, guess you can now agree the "evil crossbow" DOES in fact have supporting DATA, for adding new hunters......should be the end of that "silly' argument? NOW that there is even more data to confirm this??? Any way you choose to look at it, more tags are getting sold with inclusion of the crossbow indisputable fact...


AND A "whopping" grand total of 4% difference, should sit down and write home on that, could be that 4% more ACTUALLY FOUND their deer??:darkbeer: rather than not finding it and keeping on hunting? Could be , maybe not......not enough though to "boast about " IMHO

AND when you conclude that 32% of 52,403 "connected" and 36% of 15,077 did as well, one has to wonder IF the numbers were more close, what the results would have been????:wink:


----------



## thesource

BATTER .... UP! (This should be entertaining)



aceoky said:


> FR HERE is your buddies Va data, HE claims these ARE .... nearlyALL new hunters! (he said exactly" other than a few of these that were disabled, they were all new")


ANOTHER CROSSBOW LIE!
What I said they were all rookie crossbow hunters...never had hunted with a crossbow before, since they were illegal the year before.

I never said they were new to archery, and I especially never said they were new to hunting.

Another shining example of your misinformation, at its finest. 



aceoky said:


> So, according to VA data posted by YOUR side, guess you can now agree the "evil crossbow" DOES in fact have supporting DATA, for adding new hunters......should be the end of that "silly' argument? NOW that there is even more data to confirm this???


See above. Please reveal ANY data that would show the number of new hunters that have been added ... you cannot.  

In the maentime, let me give you some real data to chew on. When they added crossbows, the number of bowhunting licenses went down 7000. DIRECT evidence that crossbows hurt bowhunting. 



aceoky said:


> Any way you choose to look at it, more tags are getting sold with inclusion of the crossbow indisputable fact...


WRONG again. VA has a set number of tags for each hunter, and does not give weapon specific tags. Therefore, you cannot conclude that more tags were sold due to inclusion of the crossbow. The only number that matters to tags sold is the total number of deer hunters, regardless of their weapons. 



aceoky said:


> AND A "whopping" grand total of 4% difference, should sit down and write home on that...


Let me put the numbers in a bit more perspective for you, since you appear incapable. That means that rookie crossbow hunters were 12.5% more efficient at harvesting deer than the bowhunters (who, it goes without saying, include a fair number of very experienced bowhunters.)

More perspective - what Jim said was: _"no higher harvest rates WHICH AGAIN IS ALL THAT COUNTS"_ I'm sure that even you will agree that 36% is higher than 32% .... duh. 



aceoky said:


> could be that 4% more ACTUALLY FOUND their deer??:darkbeer: rather than not finding it and keeping on hunting?


More poisonous bowhunter bashing. Pretty divisive, if you ask me...


----------



## Jim C

The only poisonous bowhunter bashing comes from the corner of greed that wants to tell crossbow hunters that their trophies really don't count and that they are lazy

stop with your fairy stories Source-you are the anti bowhunter on this forum

30 years in OHio no provable difference in harvest rates 

did the VA study include trads with compounds source?


----------



## awshucks

*in ky*

Arrow & string & bent limbs = Archery
American= Freedom of Choice of Archery equipment in archery season.
Get with it, or get over it.


----------



## Free Range

Ace you are grabbing at straws again. For one thing I don’t see anywhere in your post where anyone but you said these are new hunters. So if you are going to quote someone please provide “their” quote and the source so we can verify.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Ace you are grabbing at straws again. For one thing I don’t see anywhere in your post where anyone but you said these are new hunters. So if you are going to quote someone please provide “their” quote and the source so we can verify.



adding new bowhunters is not the issue-the issue is allowing freedom of choice as long as that freedom doesn't harm anyone

using a crossbow instead of a compound hurts no one (except maybe a compound seller) It doesn't hurt the source (his ego doesn't count) and it certainly doesn't hurt the deer herd

end of story

Maybe we should start a poll-IF xbows become the dominant archery weapon in the next 30 years should xbow archers allow people like the source to hunt in OUR season :wink:


----------



## Free Range

> adding new bowhunters is not the issue-the issue is allowing freedom of choice as long as that freedom doesn't harm anyone


you need to take that up with Ace.



> using a crossbow instead of a compound hurts no one (except maybe a compound seller) It doesn't hurt the source (his ego doesn't count) and it certainly doesn't hurt the deer herd


Nor would using a gun, with bag limits



> Maybe we should start a poll-IF xbows become the dominant archery weapon in the next 30 years should xbow archers allow people like the source to hunt in OUR season


And our fears are unfounded????


----------



## aceoky

Fact is: there WERE some 14,000 NEW tags sold(that would be MORE btw).. in Virginia, the DNR (forget what exactly they go by)...says those were because of the crossbow being legal, take that up with them IF you don't like it! NEW tags sold = NEW hunters.....by any stretch of anyone's imagination, had they already been hunting, there would be NO additional tags sold(in fact less, since some hunters likely died, over the season)....period

I agree , it's about choice, but IF we can add to OUR numbers that's a "good thing", and positive for all of us! IMHO anyway...


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Fact is: there WERE some 14,000 NEW tags sold(that would be MORE btw).. in Virginia, the DNR (forget what exactly they go by)...says those were because of the crossbow being legal, take that up with them IF you don't like it! NEW tags sold = NEW hunters.....by any stretch of anyone's imagination, had they already been hunting, there would be NO additional tags sold(in fact less, since some hunters likely died, over the season)....period...


I hope you are merely pretending to be this logically challenged.

First of all, they sold 14,000 new crossbow licenses because of crossbows, not tags....that is what we put on the deer, and in VA you apparently get 5 of them regardless of the weapon you are carrying.

New crossbow licenses sold = new crossbow hunters (and they HAD to be new crossbow hunters because they were ILLEGAL before this), but it sure doesn't mean that they are all new hunters.  

It ABSOLUTELY means that if they had already been hunting they are still REQUIRED to buy a crossbow license if they wanted to hunt with one. I don't see why this is difficult for you to understand.


----------



## aceoky

I stand 100% behind exactly what I said, unlike "some" I actually called and talked to them in Va, and was told that "in excess" of 14,000, *additional* (MORE or NEW ) tags" were sold, NOT fewer, MORE tags were sold, and they had NO doubt it was because of the crossbow"......funny how facts are meaningless to "some"ukey: 

Again, don't like it take it up with them, no need to try to "shoot the messenger", as "some" always try when things are not going "their way"...


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> I stand 100% behind exactly what I said, unlike "some" I actually called and talked to them in Va, and was told that "in excess" of 14,000, *additional* (MORE or NEW ) tags" were sold, NOT fewer, MORE tags were sold, and they had NO doubt it was because of the crossbow"......funny how facts are meaningless to "some"ukey:
> 
> Again, don't like it take it up with them, no need to try to "shoot the messenger", as "some" always try when things are not going "their way"...


wow. I cannot find the words to describe what I'm thinking right now.

Something in excess of 14,000 , huh?

Think it was like, oh, I don't know, let's take a stab at it, roughly, maybe .....

*Resident Crossbow - 14,522*?


Duh. You are confusing yourself with tags and stamps, and starting to look even more foolish than usual.


----------



## aceoky

Sure I am, but considering the source, I'll take *that* as a compliment! 

Facts support the inclusion of the crossbow, opinions, "feelings", false accusations don't matter and have NO place in any of these discussions......once stated that should suffice, then it's time to back some of it up(at least) with some relevent data, while you three are quick to disagree with facts and data, WE are still waiting on some from all three of you.....yeah I look foolish.....NOT

So long as I *never* "look as foolish" or "unbalanced" as you come off, I'll be very happy indeed! 

There are several good reasons for inclusion, WE still await some for NOT allowing them into the archery seasons....something with some actual data and facts to support it would be nice for a change btw......other than YOUR opinions of what "is" or "isn't a bow".....and such nonsense.....GOOD reasoning behind the claims, that is what we'd all like to see from that side of this issue, WE've not seen any in Ky.....and we're winning because of that fact....period....

IF you three are going to continue your "net wide crusade" against crossbow inclusion, you will NEED to find some actual factual, relevent data to help you out, without it, it WILL happen.......:darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> You keep saying this, but in your thousands of post I have read, I have seen NO data from you that proves the x-bow is good for bow season.
> 
> I've shown real hard data to YOU from every state that they're legal, even within their own season , YOU decide to state that YOUR opinion carries more weight than that data, why would anyone continue to post real data, when some "think" they know more than the "experts" in their field??? Waste of time IMHO...By now most who have actually read many of my many posts on this and other issues know that I have the real truth and facts, your opinon of what that is, means less than nothing to me....fwiw
> 
> 
> This will be the third time this week I have asked you to post real facts, so we can both can get back to debating instead of the crap flying around.
> If you want to continue with the attacks that’s fine too, but really it makes you look bad.
> 
> Talk about the pot calling the kettle black,but whatever...
> 
> 
> 
> .


Something for you guys to seriously consider, when you have nothing on your side, to constantly question real data only helps us....instead of asking me to post what i've done so many times, how about you posting some real hard data that shows everyone for a fact of the harm of including the crossbow in the archery season......not opinions or "dillution" in your view, some real hard data, let's see you do that.......then I'll re-post some real hard data from several states, let's see what most believe, shall we?:darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> IF you three are going to continue your "net wide crusade" against crossbow inclusion, you will NEED to find some actual factual, relevent data to help you out, without it, it WILL happen.......:darkbeer:


Does that mean you choose to ignore the actual fact that VA crossbow hunters were 12.5% more efficient than VA bowhunters? 

Figures.

No matter. The mainstream sees the facts for what they are.


----------



## thesource

xbowhunter1 said:


> ........or the seasons over run with lazy gun hunters!
> 
> Prove your nonsense!
> XbowHunter1



See: OHIO

120,000 stringunners (including Twogun and JimC)
80,000 bowhunters

THAT is the definition of overrun!!


----------



## thesource

Doug -

you asked for evidence that the season was overrun with lazy gun hunters - I gave you Ohio.

Now you wish to discuss the possibility of multiple weapons ... make up your mind.


----------



## Jim C

Hey source-how is anything hurt by the fact that more people use crossbows in a recreational activity than compounds?


----------



## thesource

Bowhunting is hurt.

Ohio has one of the lowest bowhunter recruitment levels in the nation.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Bowhunting is hurt.
> 
> Ohio has one of the lowest bowhunter recruitment levels in the nation.



proof-OH I FORGOT-source doesn't consider all those xbow hunters to be bowhunters

again we get the nutty circular reasoning as a pathetic response


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Does that mean you choose to ignore the actual fact that VA crossbow hunters were 12.5% more efficient than VA bowhunters?
> 
> Figures.
> 
> No matter. The mainstream sees the facts for what they are.


THEY(VA) have a 4% differnce AND they have MORE bowhunters (by YOUR post btw) by over several hundred.......NICE try but 4% is NOT 12.5% now IS IT??

YOU posted this............NOW YOU deal with it.......OK?

HERE IT IS exactly as YOU posted IT....


Virginia 2005 archery/crossbow deer season
Resident Crossbow - 14,522
Non-Resident Crossbow -525
15,077 total crossbowers

36% success ratio


Resident Archery - 51,714
Non-Resident Archery - 2,489
54,203 total archers

32% success ratio

So using YOUR data

36 -
32=
12.5% ????????????????????

WHO do YOu think is "buying that"??????

THAT is a 4% difference even a 10 yr old can see that!!

And given the MOST are NOT using crossbows.......do YOU really want to "do the numbers"???????

Say how many OF those using which weapon actually had a KILL??

NO YOU don't because anyone can see MORE were killed with "other bows" rather than with crossbows......

YOU few need to "get a clue"............it's ONLY dividing all of us......and your BS is "way old" by now.......fwiw


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> So using YOUR data
> 
> 36 -
> 32=
> 12.5% ????????????????????
> 
> WHO do YOu think is "buying that"??????
> 
> THAT is a 4% difference even a 10 yr old can see that!!



It sometimes pains me to have to explain even the simplest things to you guys....its like dealing with schoolchildren.

Bowhunter success rate =32%
Crossbow success rate =36%

Therefore, crossbowers are more efficient than bowhunters. You do not simply subtract to determine the answer, because that is not the direct comparison of these weapon's effectiveness. You divide by the bowhunting number (and multiply by 100%) to determine the percent increase, like so.

36-32/32 x 100% = 12.5% more efficient.

I believe this is 7th or 8th grade math.






aceoky said:


> And given the MOST are NOT using crossbows.......do YOU really want to "do the numbers"???????
> Say how many OF those using which weapon actually had a KILL??
> NO YOU don't because anyone can see MORE were killed with "other bows" rather than with crossbows......


Now you've really done it. Jim wants to compare harvest rate, says its the only thing that matters, so those numbers drive directly to his point.

Jim is much too smart to open the door you just did - raw harvest. Why? Because the crossbow kill in OH DWARFS the vertical bow kill, that's why. If raw numbers are the metric you want to use, than Ohio proves that crossbows are SIGNIFICANTLY more effective than vertical bows. 


You need to think before you attack. For someone who claims to have all the facts and never get proven incorrect....you sure are wrong a lot.


----------



## cynic

And with this 12.5% increase will you also break down for us the increase efficiency between the compound and recurve..and can you also help us to understand where each of the xbowers were hunting in reference to game density and if this increase came strictly off of public land that everyone has access to since private land is off limits to the general public and the affects of the xbow would not be felt by the general populus in these areas. I would venture to say that many xbowers are gun hunters on private or leased land taking advantage of the added equipment. Before we jump in the fire here we need these statistics. Since we are looking for inclusion for everyone on land that everyone is entitled to and the affects that the xbow will have on hunters hunting together with each different weapon. Remember private/leased land gets to make their own rules for weapon use. 
Xbow kills on public land.
xbow kills on private/leased land.
xbow kills by previously vertical archery hunters.
xbow kills by 1st time hunters.
average days hunted.
average deer density of areas of xbow kills.
Then we will need the same for vertical bows broken down into weapon type

Source while your statistics are very general and do show an increase they don't give the whole picture. Source since you seem to be the leader of your group in supplying data and analyzing it will you get the above needed information,supply links to the source of your data so we can do an analysis for our side based on your data?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> It sometimes pains me to have to explain even the simplest things to you guys....its like dealing with schoolchildren.
> 
> Bowhunter success rate =32%
> Crossbow success rate =36%
> 
> Therefore, crossbowers are more efficient than bowhunters. You do not simply subtract to determine the answer, because that is not the direct comparison of these weapon's effectiveness. You divide by the bowhunting number (and multiply by 100%) to determine the percent increase, like so.
> 
> 36-32/32 x 100% = 12.5% more efficient.
> 
> I believe this is 7th or 8th grade math.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now you've really done it. Jim wants to compare harvest rate, says its the only thing that matters, so those numbers drive directly to his point.
> 
> Jim is much too smart to open the door you just did - raw harvest. Why? Because the crossbow kill in OH DWARFS the vertical bow kill, that's why. If raw numbers are the metric you want to use, than Ohio proves that crossbows are SIGNIFICANTLY more effective than vertical bows.
> 
> 
> You need to think before you attack. For someone who claims to have all the facts and never get proven incorrect....you sure are wrong a lot.



I have never been proven wrong on crossbows source because there is no one on the other side who has one twentieth the amount of knowledge about this topic as I do. I also have never made any statements that can be proven wrong. I have commented only on Ohio harvest rates noting NO ONE CAN PROVE that crossbows have an advantage

I also am correct in noting that in OBJECTIVE tests of accuracy, NO ONE can prove that crossbows have an advantage over compounds. I have correctly noted that your bovine droppings that xbows aren't bows or archery is not only a cowardly substitute for a real argument-it has no basis in fact given the undeniable fact groups that support archery (rather than are narrow greedy bowhunting groups) all accept xbows as part of archery

I merely asked in VA if non crossbow harvests include trad bows lumped with compounds. If so, then you cannot accurately claim crossbows have a higher percentage than compounds. Since you note those crossbows are being used by first time bowhunters, there might be other reasons for this number as well

that being first time bowhunters are more likely to shoot a doe or a small buck while long time bowhunters or holding out for bigger bucks

nice try source but 4% is hardly a big deal worthy of archery apartheid and given you can't distinquish between wheelies and trads etc YOU LOSE again


----------



## thesource

cynic said:


> And with this 12.5% increase will you also break down for us the increase efficiency between the compound and recurve..and can you also help us to understand where each of the xbowers were hunting in reference to game density and if this increase came strictly off of public land that everyone has access to since private land is off limits to the general public and the affects of the xbow would not be felt by the general populus in these areas. I would venture to say that many xbowers are gun hunters on private or leased land taking advantage of the added equipment. Before we jump in the fire here we need these statistics. Since we are looking for inclusion for everyone on land that everyone is entitled to and the affects that the xbow will have on hunters hunting together with each different weapon. Remember private/leased land gets to make their own rules for weapon use.
> Xbow kills on public land.
> xbow kills on private/leased land.
> xbow kills by previously vertical archery hunters.
> xbow kills by 1st time hunters.
> average days hunted.
> average deer density of areas of xbow kills.
> Then we will need the same for vertical bows broken down into weapon type
> 
> Source while your statistics are very general and do show an increase they don't give the whole picture. Source since you seem to be the leader of your group in supplying data and analyzing it will you get the above needed information,supply links to the source of your data so we can do an analysis for our side based on your data?



LOL.

When all we had was the made up guesses of harvest rate by ODNR, I said that we should consider the extrenuating circumstances that might impact harvest rate - no one would listen.

Now the first accurate data comes out of VA and you are all crying about extrenuating circumstances .... too funny.

I'll be the first to admit that additional details are needed to truly understand the efficiency differences between crossbows and bows. The real number must be broken down to harvest rate/hrs hunting/weapon, and should take into consideration the experience levels of the participants.

Go find that data and report back. 

In the meantime, take your medicine. You are on the wrong side of the statistic that your side has touted like a club for years, even though they did not have the actual data to back it up.


----------



## cynic

Was all that your way of saying that you are scared that you might find out something that you and yours don't want to know and therefore will put the burden on someone else? The data is not accurate nor complete..Please find the complete accurate data and get back to us


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I have never been proven wrong on crossbows source because there is no one on the other side who has one twentieth the amount of knowledge about this topic as I do. I also have never made any statements that can be proven wrong. I have commented only on Ohio harvest rates noting NO ONE CAN PROVE that crossbows have an advantage


You get proven wrong daily. When Marvin gets in one of his moods, he makes you look like an absolute chump.

You have not restricted your comments to OH, but you should have. Since OH does not sell a separate crossbow license they cannot determine an actual crossbow harvest rate. Therfore your statement NO ONE CAN PROVE that crossbows have an advantage" in OH is 100% true, because no data exists. On the other hand, I can say that NO ONE CAN PROVE that they don't have an advantage in OH for the same reason.




Jim C said:


> I also am correct in noting that in OBJECTIVE tests of accuracy, NO ONE can prove that crossbows have an advantage over compounds.


I think we could. If we performed the experiment I have outlined before, just grabbing average bowhunters and having them shoot both bow and crossbow, we would see very clearly what the effective accuracy (and its impact on effective range) would be. 



Jim C said:


> I have correctly noted that your bovine droppings that xbows aren't bows or archery is not only a cowardly substitute for a real argument-it has no basis in fact given the undeniable fact groups that support archery (rather than are narrow greedy bowhunting groups) all accept xbows as part of archery


Unfortunately for you, this debate is about bowhunting and not archery, Your groups are irrelevant, as is your opinion.



Jim C said:


> I merely asked in VA if non crossbow harvests include trad bows lumped with compounds. If so, then you cannot accurately claim crossbows have a higher percentage than compounds. Since you note those crossbows are being used by first time bowhunters, there might be other reasons for this number as well
> 
> that being first time bowhunters are more likely to shoot a doe or a small buck while long time bowhunters or holding out for bigger bucks


Ah - extrenuating circumstances. See my previous post.

You are unwilling to discuss extrenuating circumstances until you are on the losing side of a statistic.....which doesn't surprise me at all.



Jim C said:


> nice try source but 4% is hardly a big deal worthy of archery apartheid and given you can't distinquish between wheelies and trads etc YOU LOSE again


As I pointed out, when you directly compare the harvest rate of crossbows to bows, stringguns enjoy a 12.5% increase in efficiency. Not trivial.

Given it was the first year that they were allowed to use them, combined with the fact that VA is the only state to calculate an actual crossbow harvest rate, it will be very interesting to watch the VA numbers in the years to come as crossbow hunters gain some experience.


----------



## cynic

Source please supply the link to your published data for further analysis


----------



## thesource

cynic said:


> Was all that your way of saying that you are scared that you might find out something that you and yours don't want to know and therefore will put the burden on someone else? The data is not accurate nor complete..Please find the complete accurate data and get back to us


LOL - that's not how it works.

The burden of proof is on you - the numbers are what they are until you can prove otherwise.

Funny how much y'all squeal when the shoe is on the other foot.


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> LOL - that's not how it works.
> 
> The burden of proof is on you - the numbers are what they are until you can prove otherwise.
> 
> Funny how much y'all squeal when the shoe is on the other foot.


Source again I could not find any link posted by you to verify authenticity of YOUR published facts please provide a link


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You get proven wrong daily. When Marvin gets in one of his moods, he makes you look like an absolute chump..


I haven't seen anyone back you up on your hero worshipping nonsense. I have never been proven wrong by anyone as to crossbows Source since I am open in my reasons and I dont have to engage in subterfuge or camoflauge my agenda or my reasons. That I was a ranked recurve archer makes it sort of tough for people with no credentials to claim I am too lazy to use a "real bow"
I don't recall Marvin doing anything other than noting Ohio hunting numbers are down which hardly is an argument against crossbows.



thesource said:


> You have not restricted your comments to OH, but you should have. Since OH does not sell a separate crossbow license they cannot determine an actual crossbow harvest rate. Therfore your statement NO ONE CAN PROVE that crossbows have an advantage" in OH is 100% true, because no data exists. On the other hand, I can say that NO ONE CAN PROVE that they don't have an advantage in OH for the same reason.


.

Yet those who run things here say there is no advantage and as a matter of law, bureaucrats charged with certain duties are presumed to be accurate unless CLEAR AND CONVINCING proof can be mustered to the contrary. You cannot so legally, the findings of the OHIO DNR are accepted as factual. Guess what, the method they use is no different than the methods they use to determine herd numbers-a scientific guesstimation since obviously there is no exact way to measure deer. Nonetheless there is NO EVIDENCE the Ohio herd has been hurt by 30 years of xbow hunting






thesource said:


> I think we could. If we performed the experiment I have outlined before, just grabbing average bowhunters and having them shoot both bow and crossbow, we would see very clearly what the effective accuracy (and its impact on effective range) would be.


I thought you were against average bowhunters and only want the elite to hunt. THe problem with your nonsense is that you can't define average bowhunter and you know that so its a claim that will never be able to be tested





thesource said:


> Unfortunately for you, this debate is about bowhunting and not archery, Your groups are irrelevant, as is your opinion.


again you are moronic to claim that the IBO and the NFAA (the latter was a main group getting bowhunting legalized and before it the NAA was since it was the major national organization pushing hunting-Poop and Dung wasn't even a player) aren't bowhunting advocates and when it comes to a clash of opinions, the credentials of the proponents comes into play

people know my credentials and I have well regared experts on this board who can testify that I am what I say I am. You, on the other hand, have no such support and apparently you may lie about your standing as one poster has noted you may pretend to be things you are not





thesource said:


> Ah - extrenuating circumstances. See my previous post.
> 
> You are unwilling to discuss extrenuating circumstances until you are on the losing side of a statistic.....which doesn't surprise me at all.



I merely note that a 4% difference is meaningless and it appears that is all you have to support your facade for what really motivates you, a deep seated psychological problem that most of us have seen





thesource said:


> As I pointed out, when you directly compare the harvest rate of crossbows to bows, stringguns enjoy a 12.5% increase in efficiency. Not trivial.
> 
> Given it was the first year that they were allowed to use them, combined with the fact that VA is the only state to calculate an actual crossbow harvest rate, it will be very interesting to watch the VA numbers in the years to come as crossbow hunters gain some experience


the stringgun comment is the pathetic sign of someone who cannot win the argument so he engages in a term he thinks will convince the weak minded. 

again you lose Source because you refuse to tell the board your really reasons even though we saw it the other night with your pathetic psychobable about needing a filter to keep other citizens from participating in a recreational activity


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Yet those who run things here say there is no advantage and as a matter of law, bureaucrats charged with certain duties are presumed to be accurate unless CLEAR AND CONVINCING proof can be mustered to the contrary. You cannot so legally, the findings of the OHIO DNR are accepted as factual. Guess what, the method they use is no different than the methods they use to determine herd numbers-a scientific guesstimation since obviously there is no exact way to measure deer. Nonetheless there is NO EVIDENCE the Ohio herd has been hurt by 30 years of xbow hunting


You mean the same bureaucrats that were bribed by Horton? LOL.

They cannot know the harvest rate - cannot - since they do not know how many actually use crossbows in OH.

By the way - I never said crossbows would hurt any herd, and I have never seen any crossbow opponent say it would.

That is just a myth you make up - I'm not really sure why you do it, either.

The rest of the trash in the post isn't worth commenting on.


----------



## cynic

posted by theSource
*Virginia 2005 archery/crossbow deer
season
Resident Crossbow - 14,522
Non-Resident Crossbow -525
15,077 total crossbowers

36% success ratio


Resident Archery - 51,714
Non-Resident Archery - 2,489
54,203 total archers

32% success ratio*
Pls supply the link to this

Lets look at this
http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/hunting/deerharvest.asp
2005-2006 Deer Kill Summary
During the 2005 deer season 214,675 deer were reported killed by hunters in Virginia. This total included 100,927 antlered bucks, 20,357 button bucks, and 93,391 does (43.5%). The 2005 kill figure represents a 3% decrease from the 221,492 deer reported killed in 2004. It is, however, 4% greater than the past 10-year average of 206,900.


Which after reading further 2 1/2 percent of the 4% increase is comprised of xbow kills otherwise without it would only be an increase of 1 1/2 percent greater. Even those seeing the xbow as evil will have to admit it is also necessary for herd control 
Across the state, deer kill levels were down 13% in the northern mountains, up 1% in the northern piedmont, down 11% in the southern mountains, down 2% in the southern piedmont, and up 6% in tidewater.

Archers, not including crossbow hunters, killed 17,291 deer. The 2005 bow kill was up 8% from the 16,055 deer taken by archers in 2003. The bow kill comprised 8% of the total deer kill.

Crossbows, which were legal for all deer hunters for the first time in fall 2005, resulted in a deer kill of 5,476 deer or 2-1/2% of the total deer kill.

Muzzleloader hunters killed 49,356 deer. The 2005 muzzleloader kill was up 1% from the 48,797 deer taken by muzzleloader hunters in 2004. Muzzleloading comprised 23% of the total deer kill.

Over 108,600 deer (approximately 51%) were checked using the Department's telephone checking system for fall 2005. This was up from 44% in 2004.

White-tailed deer management in Virginia is based on the fact that herd density and health are best controlled by regulating antlerless deer kill levels. Female deer kill numbers have been at record levels for the past three consecutive years.

Deer management objectives and regulations are set on a county basis, and regulations are evaluated and amended every other year on odd years. Over the vast majority of the Commonwealth of Virginia, current deer management objectives call for the deer herd(s) to be stabilized at their early to mid 1990’s deer kill levels and appear to be working fairly well over most of the state. 

Data presented in this summary is preliminary.
_________________________________________________________________
Wouldn't you say that for herd control additional opportunities are needed


Q.Do I need a big game license (bear, deer, turkey license) in addition to a crossbow license? 
AYes, if hunting bear, deer, or turkey with a crossbow during an archery 
season. 
Q.Is there a maximum draw weight poundage? 
A.Crossbows are considered a type of bow and arrow and therefore have the same requirements in archery tackle specifications as a conventional bow. Thus a crossbow must be capable of propelling a broadhead arrow at least 125 yards.


----------



## aceoky

Those Va numbers do list all bows, together, trad with compounds as far as I can find out.....so once again JimC get's the prize! 

Also, since Va is a "big bowhunting state", I'd guess many set up wives, girlfriends fathers and youth up on very good spots, as it should be "passing it on"......a Positive IMHO!

The fact is; I feel that Va data is a huge help to the pro-expansion side, it proves among other things, that it is a very good idea, and caused 0 harm to the resources!


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You mean the same bureaucrats that were bribed by Horton? LOL.
> 
> They cannot know the harvest rate - cannot - since they do not know how many actually use crossbows in OH.
> 
> By the way - I never said crossbows would hurt any herd, and I have never seen any crossbow opponent say it would.
> 
> That is just a myth you make up - I'm not really sure why you do it, either.
> 
> The rest of the trash in the post isn't worth commenting on.


of course you cannot comment on it-you don't have the education

you run a dangerous risk here source-we don't know who you are so I can -within the limits of the board-bash your inane nonsense. You on the other hand are running rather close to actionable slander saying that these people were bribed by horton given the fact that horton didn't even have a US corporate face in the USA when crossbows were legalized in Ohio.

If xbows don't hurt the herd then the only thing they could possibly hurt are the egos of people with serious mental issues


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Those Va numbers do list all bows, together, trad with compounds as far as I can find out.....so once again JimC get's the prize!
> 
> Also, since Va is a "big bowhunting state", I'd guess many set up wives, girlfriends fathers and youth up on very good spots, as it should be "passing it on"......a Positive IMHO!
> 
> The fact is; I feel that Va data is a huge help to the pro-expansion side, it proves among other things, that it is a very good idea, and caused 0 harm to the resources!


LOL.

You will try to spin anything.

For the record, VA is not a particularly "big bowhunting state." Even if you add in crossbows the "archers" total about 65,000.

Michigan has 315,000 bowhunters, WI - 285000, PA - 250000 NY - 200000.

Va is still relatively underhunted compared to the others.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> of course you cannot comment on it-you don't have the education
> 
> you run a dangerous risk here source-we don't know who you are so I can -within the limits of the board-bash your inane nonsense. You on the other hand are running rather close to actionable slander saying that these people were bribed by horton given the fact that horton didn't even have a US corporate face in the USA when crossbows were legalized in Ohio.
> 
> If xbows don't hurt the herd then the only thing they could possibly hurt are the egos of people with serious mental issues


Actionable Slander? 

You are a very funny man. It was in papers all over the place - you better go after them first! 


Noone said stringguns have to hurt anything (except your thumbs, perhaps when you leave them up too high - lol). The question is do they belong in bowseasons? The clear answer is no.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Actionable Slander?
> 
> You are a very funny man. It was in papers all over the place - you better go after them first!
> 
> 
> Noone said stringguns have to hurt anything (except your thumbs, perhaps when you leave them up too high - lol). The question is do they belong in bowseasons? The clear answer is no.



again we have a clash of opinions and when that happens, the credibility of the opinion maker comes into play

Again you lose since you have no credibility and your opinion is based on self centered greed

LETS TRY FOR THE LAST TIME

HOW IS BOWHUNTING HURT BY ACCEPTING THE NAA/NFAA/IBO/ATA definition of archery equipment


----------



## aceoky

Speaking of spin, now post these states "overall populations" so we can actually compare them.......


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As I pointed out, when you directly compare the harvest rate of crossbows to bows, stringguns enjoy a 12.5% increase in efficiency. Not trivial.
> 
> Interesting....why is that "not trivial" when we know the compound's success rate over trad bows is much higher?? Why is one difference "fine" to overlook, the other isn't "trivial"??
> 
> Given it was the first year that they were allowed to use them, combined with the fact that VA is the only state to calculate an actual crossbow harvest rate, it will be very interesting to watch the VA numbers in the years to come as crossbow hunters gain some experience.


Yep, better watch them very closely, after all they took a whopping 2 1/2 % of the total deer harvest......call NBC, CBS , CNN......etc etc  

I'd still like to know what another (should be fellow hunter) uses especially in KY, Tenn, Va , etc. bothers you so much.....??


----------



## thesource

You sure you don't use a crossbow?

You are too lazy to do things for yourself....whether that be look up facts or work for your own season.

Anyway, knowing that you are math challenged, I will not only give you the state pop but put it in some context with regards to hunters. OK?

VA = 7,203, 542 people, 65000 "archers" = 0.9% of the pop hunts with a bow.
MI = 10050446 and 315000 = 3.1%
WI = 5441196 and 285000 = 5.2%
PA = 12335,000 and 250000 = 2.0%
NY = 19157532 and 200000 = 1.0%

Therefore, MI has a 244% higher bow use per capita than VA, WI is a whopping 478% higher. NY and PA are still higher, but closer due to the population influence of the very big cities (who typically don't hunt, anyway)

Big bowhunting states.

Did you know if you extrapolated OH's crossbow useage % to MI, there would be a total of 787,000 "archers" in bow season?

Now THAT would be a crowded season.


----------



## Jim C

gee source, I use a crossbow and I could kick your butt shooting any type of bow and you have the nerve to call people lazy?

I am waiting for you to address your true reasons for whining about xbows-part of overcoming a psychosis is to admit it exists


----------



## cynic

Source we can not consider your data as valid without specifying a link to back your data. otherwise we have to consider the source. I am still waiting on a link to the original data for VA where you obtain the statistics..


----------



## thesource

Jim -
Yea, but in the statistic that matters to bow hunting I am whipping your hind end.

Even though that means I am a better bowhunter than you, I will be big enough to admit you are most likely a better tournament archer than I am.

I guess that means we're even.


----------



## thesource

cynic said:


> Source we can not consider your data as valid without specifying a link to back your data. otherwise we have to consider the source. I am still waiting on a link to the original data for VA where you obtain the statistics..


Well go find it and quit pestering me - do I have to do everything for you guys? Geez.

I found it in one of Willie's posts. Go look in the crossbow forum. Do SOME work instead of always whining.

Source, give me a link.
Source, do the math for me.
Source, explain the term "nominal" to me.

You guys need to do your share around here.


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> Jim -
> Yea, but in the statistic that matters to bow hunting I am whipping your hind end.
> 
> Even though that means I am a better bowhunter than you, I will be big enough to admit you are most likely a better tournament archer than I am.
> 
> I guess that means we're even.


I don't believe that for one minute..Sitting in a stand holding a foreign object (bow) does not make you a bow hunter. I only means you are sitting in a stand with an object foreign to you


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Jim -
> Yea, but in the statistic that matters to bow hunting I am whipping your hind end.
> 
> Even though that means I am a better bowhunter than you, I will be big enough to admit you are most likely a better tournament archer than I am.
> 
> I guess that means we're even.


no source you keep losing because I argue for the rights of other citizens and hunters while you argue for your ego and mental problems

You haven't come close to whipping me and you actually lost the argument when you CONCEDED that xbows don't hurt anything

that you admit to allowing a seperate xbow season means your only reason for your argument is based on your ego which means you lose


----------



## cynic

Okay so it is agreed spewing fiction for fact. If you post it as factual data post the link to back it


----------



## thesource

Cynic. Look back and see who posted the VA data in this thread.


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> Cynic. Look back and see who posted the VA data in this thread.


You used it as factual. So back it up.....


----------



## cynic

#97 May 15th, 2006, 03:45 PM 
thesource 
Registered User Join Date: May 2005
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 1,957 

Marvin -

Here is the data from VA (the ONLY state (to my knowledge) to have an accurate number of crossbow hunters (because they have a separate stamp) and crossbow harvest:

Virginia 2005 archery/crossbow deer season
Resident Crossbow - 14,522
Non-Resident Crossbow -525
15,077 total crossbowers

36% success ratio


Resident Archery - 51,714
Non-Resident Archery - 2,489
54,203 total archers

32% success ratio

Remember, please, that all (but physically challenged) were ROOKIE crossbow hunters. It was there first time ever hunting deer with a crossbow. Let's see what happens to the harvest rate as they gain experience with shorter range hunting. 
So now is there a link?


----------



## thesource

cynic said:


> You used it as factual. So back it up.....


Yawn. it is factual. I don't have a link. Look around for yourself and find it...I already did it once, its your turn this time.


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> Yawn. it is factual. I don't have a link. Look around for yourself and find it...I already did it once, its your turn this time.


This is now considered fabricated and has no merit IMO. but consider the Source. Amazing how hard it was for him to admit there was/is no link for others to veiw his facts other than what he wants readers to see..I don't need to waste my time trying to find something that doesn't exist. To be creditable as fact *YOU* need to back it up. Here say just doesn't work. If you did it once you should be able to find it rather easy..I don't think it is too much to ask that you back up your babble


----------



## thesource

LOL

couldn't see that coming. 

You will only look more stupid when a link finally gets posted.


----------



## aceoky

36%
-32%
__________
still 4%

Not enough for anyone to be concerned with, first year or ten years down the road imho:darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

What would be enough to concern you, aceoky?

10%?
20%?

Or is the truth that no amount of disparity between bows and crossbows would convince you that crossbows do not belong in bow season?


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> LOL
> 
> couldn't see that coming.
> 
> You will only look more stupid when a link finally gets posted.


Key word finally and even then it will be speculative as to whether fact or fiction


----------



## thesource

cynic -

your grandstanding over a link does not all of a sudden change the facts. 

You better learn to live with it - those are the facts.


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> What would be enough to concern you, aceoky?
> 
> 10%?
> 20%?
> 
> Or is the truth that no amount of disparity between bows and crossbows would convince you that crossbows do not belong in bow season?


\
Know matter what the difference it still belongs..from the standing of archery and game management


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> cynic -
> 
> your grandstanding over a link does not all of a sudden change the facts.
> 
> You better learn to live with it - those are the facts.


If it can't be proven it is not a fact


----------



## thesource

This is like arguing with a child.

Here's a link to where Willie posted it as a fact: http://huntingindiana.proboards52.com/index.cgi?board=crossbow&action=display&thread=1145558047

Go argue with him about it for awhile.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> What would be enough to concern you, aceoky?
> 
> 10%?
> 20%?
> 
> Or is the truth that no amount of disparity between bows and crossbows would convince you that crossbows do not belong in bow season?


Well, first, what is the % difference in compounds and longbows??? :wink:
As long as the resources are not in any danger, and we know they're not, it is not even relevent, except to you I suppose, since you keep bringing it up,, still with ONLY a 2 1/2 % of the TOTAL kill, it's really not a "big deal" in my view.....

Bet it's not hard to see who kills the other 97%+ and who pays the most of the bills there as in most (if not all states ) is it? 
Though some of you deem it "wise" to insult them at every given chance, I hope they don't make us all pay one day, for that and those tactics.......


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> This is like arguing with a child.
> 
> Here's a link to where Willie posted it as a fact: http://huntingindiana.proboards52.com/index.cgi?board=crossbow&action=display&thread=1145558047
> Virginia 2005 archery/crossbow deer season
> « Thread Started on Apr 20, 2006, 2:34pm »
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Virginia 2005 archery/crossbow deer season
> 
> Resident Crossbow - 14,522
> 
> Non-Resident Crossbow -525
> 
> 15,077 total crossbowers
> 
> 36% success ratio
> Resident Archery - 51,714
> Non-Resident Archery - 2,489
> 54,203 total archers
> 32% success ratio
> Archers, not including crossbow hunters, killed 17,291 deer. The 2005 bow kill was up 8% from the 16,055 deer taken by archers in 2003. The bow kill comprised 8% of the total deer kill.
> 
> Crossbows, which were legal for all deer hunters for the first time in fall 2005, resulted in a deer kill of 5,476 deer or 2-1/2% of the total deer kill.
> 
> 
> Go argue with him about it for awhile.


This is Sources version
#97 May 15th, 2006, 03:45 PM 
thesource 
Registered User Join Date: May 2005
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 1,957 

Marvin -

Here is the data from VA (the ONLY state (to my knowledge) to have an accurate number of crossbow hunters (because they have a separate stamp) and crossbow harvest:

Virginia 2005 archery/crossbow deer season
Resident Crossbow - 14,522
Non-Resident Crossbow -525
15,077 total crossbowers

36% success ratio


Resident Archery - 51,714
Non-Resident Archery - 2,489
54,203 total archers

32% success ratio

Remember, please, that all (but physically challenged) were ROOKIE crossbow hunters. It was there first time ever hunting deer with a crossbow. Let's see what happens to the harvest rate as they gain experience with shorter range hunting. 

This is the misleading part while they do have an accurate count on xbow hunters they do not have an accurate count on harvest, the only accurate data is from the check stations and clearly the numbers from call ins fluctuates leading one to believe that not all are counted on either side of the table.

There are similarities but for some reason Source felt the need to change/add to the post in order to benefit him for the sake of arguement..
http://www.dgif.virginia.gov/hunting/deerharvest.asp

Over 108,600 deer (approximately 51%) were checked using the Department's telephone checking system for fall 2005. This was up from 44% in 2004.


These numbers are based only on the numbers presented to the Dept. which over half came from telephone calls. There is no way to have an accurate statistic without having *all* data collected. While this is what we have to work with the overall harvest still shows a decline even with the xbow. So for the good of game management and Archery season the xbow is included


----------



## cynic

Archers, not including crossbow hunters, killed 17,291 deer. The 2005 bow kill was up 8% from the 16,055 deer taken by archers in 2003. The bow kill comprised 8% of the total deer kill.

So even with the inclusion of the xbow, overall the non xbow hunters satisfaction/percentages increased. So now the question arises that has been tabled so many times."how does any persons choice to hunt with a xbow affect another hunters hunt?" clearly with higher harvest rates one can see it does not.


----------



## thesource

:crazy:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> What would be enough to concern you, aceoky?
> 
> 10%?
> 20%?
> 
> Or is the truth that no amount of disparity between bows and crossbows would convince you that crossbows do not belong in bow season?



You are caught in a lie again Source-now you are braying about a 4% difference but I can cite several of your threads where you ADMIT that xbow legalization will not hurt the herd. Obviously you realize that this slight difference-which could be based on various factors-such as trads being included with compounds (and since we all know that the difference between trads and compounds is far greater than between compounds and crossbows, that alone could explain a 4% difference)-or the fact that a new hunter is more likely to take a smaller deer is not relevant if there is no harm to the herd-which is a point you have already conceded


----------



## thesource

LOL.

Jim - 
you have gone from a worthy adversary to a dundering idiot.

YOU are the one who said all that matters is the harvest rate.

I show you evidence that crossbows have a higher harvest rate, and you switch to hurting the herd. You look like a complete fool.

I have previously stated that extraneous circumstances could be responsible for differences in harvest rate - you refused to entertain the notion and demanded that the statistics be taken at face value. Now that the statistics oppose you, you demand that extraneous circumstances be considered. You look like a fool, again.

You want to investigate various factors, such as trad harvest ratye vs compound. The only data I have seen is GA, which has trads within 1% of compounds - and you look foolish yet again.

Now you revert to "new crossbow hunters will take smaller deer?" 


LOL. You are a mere shell of your former self Jim. You look silly.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> Jim -
> you have gone from a worthy adversary to a dundering idiot.
> 
> YOU are the one who said all that matters is the harvest rate.
> 
> I show you evidence that crossbows have a higher harvest rate, and you switch to hurting the herd. You look like a complete fool.
> 
> I have previously stated that extraneous circumstances could be responsible for differences in harvest rate - you refused to entertain the notion and demanded that the statistics be taken at face value. Now that the statistics oppose you, you demand that extraneous circumstances be considered. You look like a fool, again.
> 
> You want to investigate various factors, such as trad harvest ratye vs compound. The only data I have seen is GA, which has trads within 1% of compounds - and you look foolish yet again.
> 
> Now you revert to "new crossbow hunters will take smaller deer?"
> 
> 
> LOL. You are a mere shell of your former self Jim. You look silly.


more evasive bloviation from the source of all stupidity. Your ilk claims that trad is much harder than compounds-now you claim statistics disprove it

you claim that xbows won't hurt the herd -now you whine about a 4% difference in a FIRST YEAR state and act as if its significance

You never were an adversary source-you are more like an annoying gnat I swat around like a ping pong ball

I do this because I know you will keep a buzzing and the more people who hear it get annoyed by it because you have no argument

your own ego is all that motivates your nonsense and my goal is to merely allow you to continue to contradict yourself and to expose the anti crossbow nutcases for what they really are

your comments that all xbow archers are lazy or that we need a filter was great

I plan on using that in the next CC article I write

your comments are the best weapons we have


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> you claim that xbows won't hurt the herd -now you whine about a 4% difference in a FIRST YEAR state and act as if its significance



I whine?

Hardly accurate. You have droned on and on and on and on about harvest rates.

I show you the first real data. It shows xbows as advantaged, and now you have your panties in a twist.

The most significant part IS that it is the first year. As xbow hunters gain experience, I expect the harvest rate gap will widen (as most intelligent folks intuitivaly understand.)

I'm sure someone with an Ivy League education can understand the repercussions nationwide if the first real data shows that xbows are advantaged.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I whine?
> 
> Hardly accurate. You have droned on and on and on and on about harvest rates.
> 
> I show you the first real data. It shows xbows as advantaged, and now you have your panties in a twist.
> 
> The most significant part IS that it is the first year. As xbow hunters gain experience, I expect the harvest rate gap will widen (as most intelligent folks intuitivaly understand.)
> 
> I'm sure someone with an Ivy League education can understand the repercussions nationwide if the first real data shows that xbows are advantaged.



it doesn't show that-you need more data. 

you said trad bows are so much tougher than compound bows

yet they are both grouped together

if they are advantaged-so what

compounds are clearly advantaged over trad bows

as long as there is no hurting the herd there is no rational state interest in keeping xbows out


----------



## thesource

Is that your claim now?

See , I'm confused because a few posts back you said all that mattered was the harvest rate. I can go find it and copy it in here if you need me to, you know, just to remind you what your main criteria was before today.

Need me to do that? Want me to show that is what you said?

Or will you be MAN enough to admit that you were wrong, that the harvest rate isn't necessarily the be all and end all. 

Which is it JIm?

Cowboy up.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Is that your claim now?
> 
> See , I'm confused because a few posts back you said all that mattered was the harvest rate. I can go find it and copy it in here if you need me to, you know, just to remind you what your main criteria was before today.
> 
> Need me to do that? Want me to show that is what you said?
> 
> Or will you be MAN enough to admit that you were wrong, that the harvest rate isn't necessarily the be all and end all.
> 
> Which is it JIm?
> 
> Cowboy up.


poor source-you said crossbows don't hurt anything so why are you spewing such nonsense about them?

I don't think xbows are advantaged

I don't think 4% in a first year season is probative

I cite the harvest rates because you claim you are competiting against other bowhunters

to me what matters is that everyone who wants to bowhunt gets an equal crack at it no matter what bow they use

I said earlier if the introduction of xbows means too much harvest I said that would mean decreasing hunting days not banning xbows

XBOWS MUST BE TREATED THE SAME AS COMPOUNDS for hunting

nothing more, nothing less


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> XBOWS MUST BE TREATED THE SAME AS COMPOUNDS for hunting
> 
> nothing more, nothing less


That would be fine if we could agree that they WERE the same.

We do not, and cannot.

THIS is what I repeatedly tell you. THE question is do xbows belong? You (and yours) keep changing the subject, introducing different angles. But this is where the rubber hits the road. ARE they the same? Do they BELONG?

I say no.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> That would be fine if we could agree that they WERE the same.
> 
> We do not, and cannot.
> 
> THIS is what I repeatedly tell you. THE question is do xbows belong? You (and yours) keep changing the subject, introducing different angles. But this is where the rubber hits the road. ARE they the same? Do they BELONG?
> 
> I say no.



they are not the same-they are basically equivalent.

compounds aren't the same as recurves. they are farther apart than compounds and crossbows. they are all bows-they all should be in the same bow season


----------



## thesource

Basically equivalent.

That's code for crossbows are advantaged, but since you use one they should be allowed.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Basically equivalent.
> 
> That's code for crossbows are advantaged, but since you use one they should be allowed.



you are lying again-each type of bow has certain advantages

You cannot shoot a crossbow a second time nearly as fast as a compound

that makes them somewhat different

a compound bow is almost always quieter than a crossbow-once again a difference

a compound bow can use a more ballistically efficient projectile-yet another difference

over all neither bow really has an advantage-I know that-I have been shooting compound bows for a quarter of a century and recurve and crossbows for more than 3 decades

why are you so evasive in telling us why almost every one of your 1900 or so posts are about your crossbow obsession?


----------



## thesource

I said advantaged .... that means overall. 

Second shots are irrelevant - I have never shot 2x at any animal in my 22 years of bowhunting....smoke and mirrors. Learn to hit what you're aiming at and you won't need a second shot either.

You saying that _"a compound bow can use a more ballistically efficient projectile"_ is a load of horse manure. Expand on this, for us Jim. Show us that this advantage extends out of the 5th or 6th decimal place of ballistic coefficient. In other words, prove that this is actually an advantage at all. Only a physicist would even notice the difference. 

More cheap tricks to cover up what matters.


----------



## cynic

thesource said:


> I said advantaged .... that means overall.
> 
> Second shots are irrelevant - I have never shot 2x at any animal in my 22 years of bowhunting....smoke and mirrors. Learn to hit what you're aiming at and you won't need a second shot either.
> 
> You saying that _"a compound bow can use a more ballistically efficient projectile"_ is a load of horse manure. Expand on this, for us Jim. Show us that this advantage extends out of the 5th or 6th decimal place of ballistic coefficient. In other words, prove that this is actually an advantage at all. Only a physicist would even notice the difference.
> 
> More cheap tricks to cover up what matters.


2nd shots are only irrelevant to those of you that have never taken the 1st one.


----------



## Jim C

cynic said:


> 2nd shots are only irrelevant to those of you that have never taken the 1st one.


    :dance:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I said advantaged .... that means overall.
> 
> Second shots are irrelevant - I have never shot 2x at any animal in my 22 years of bowhunting....smoke and mirrors. Learn to hit what you're aiming at and you won't need a second shot either.
> 
> You saying that _"a compound bow can use a more ballistically efficient projectile"_ is a load of horse manure. Expand on this, for us Jim. Show us that this advantage extends out of the 5th or 6th decimal place of ballistic coefficient. In other words, prove that this is actually an advantage at all. Only a physicist would even notice the difference.
> 
> More cheap tricks to cover up what matters.


Poor source-I was around when we were shooting FITAs with 2114 aluminum arrows-now I use 550 X10

Oh I forgot, Source has never shot a tournament, he wouldn't understand the concept of fletching leverage or why we spend 300 dollars for a set of arrows


----------



## aceoky

"What matters", IS that IN KY.....most hunters, landowners and to your dismay(and your "ilk's" as well), even MOST bowhunters agree! 


They say crossbows DO BELONG........:darkbeer: 

See that is the FACT; that some don't want to admit or discuss, and instead try to changed facts with opinions and ideas, however that doesn't work very well imho


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Poor source-I was around when we were shooting FITAs with 2114 aluminum arrows-now I use 550 X10
> 
> Oh I forgot, Source has never shot a tournament, he wouldn't understand the concept of fletching leverage or why we spend 300 dollars for a set of arrows


I understand the concept of fletching leverage, since it is a physical principle (us engineers tend to be fairly well versed in physical principles).

I don't understand $300/dz for arrows - but I am a tightwad (I prefer to call it thrifty).

We're waiting for you to explain the "ballistic efficiency" comment. Fletching won't cut it.

Show us how this is such an advantage, Jim.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I understand the concept of fletching leverage, since it is a physical principle (us engineers tend to be fairly well versed in physical principles).
> 
> I don't understand $300/dz for arrows - but I am a tightwad (I prefer to call it thrifty).
> 
> We're waiting for you to explain the "ballistic efficiency" comment. Fletching won't cut it.
> 
> Show us how this is such an advantage, Jim.


I am not an engineer-I am an archery coach. I didn't get a degree in engineering-I spent years shooting a bow and listening to masters like Charlie Pierson (first man to hold the national title and NR in all four flight bow classes-he didn't have an engineering degree either Source but he sure understood how to make a bow shoot really far), DP, Don Rabska, Al Kramer, and others. I know that A compound shooting an ACC arrow is going to have far better ballistics than a crossbow shooting the fatter 2219 aluminums. 

call it what you want but after seeing a few million arrows shot and having shot along side compound archers with my crossbow and vice versa- I know at 50 yards those compounds have an advantage over the crossbows on a 3D course

I also know that the crossbow is much louder and one of the greatest limitations on long distance shots on game is noise

You might have an engineering degree Source-but I am an archer. that's why you keep getting thrashed on this stuff


----------



## cynic

Jim having an engineering degree in a field unrelated to the field of discussion carries no clout. It only means he has a degree, not that he knows what he is talking about.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I am not an engineer (but) I know that A compound shooting an ACC arrow is going to have far better ballistics than a crossbow shooting the fatter 2219 aluminums.


No, Jim. That's what you believe. You actually do not know it, because it isn't true.

Launch velocity and arrow weight are the first order parameters of arrow trajectory. Diameter and length have a minor, almost insignificant effect.

You are an educated man, and as such, you should know enough to pay your respects to science. 

An exomax shooting anything is going to kick the crap out of a 60# compound shooting ACCs....believe it.

I don't think anyone will believe that you are thrashing me with regards to physics. Please feel free to continue the conversation.


----------



## cynic

Source, now would be the time to slam him with the actual ballistics..This is the perfect opportunity. Don't let it get away. You show him the ballistics at ranges out to and including 50 yds..


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> No, Jim. That's what you believe. You actually do not know it, because it isn't true.
> 
> Launch velocity and arrow weight are the first order parameters of arrow trajectory. Diameter and length have a minor, almost insignificant effect.
> 
> You are an educated man, and as such, you should know enough to pay your respects to science.
> 
> An exomax shooting anything is going to kick the crap out of a 60# compound shooting ACCs....believe it.
> 
> I don't think anyone will believe that you are thrashing me with regards to physics. Please feel free to continue the conversation.


where I thrash you source is showing that your obsession over other people enjoying a recreational activity is pathological

I thrash you by pointing out that you admit that xbows don't hurt the herd 

I thrash you when you don't have the balls to really tell us what causes your jihad against thousands of other bowhunters based on semantic nonsense

if that is so source=why do all the olympic archers use x10 arrows rather than big line cutters like 2314's.

an exomax is the most powerful bow generally available. yet you compare it to what is an average hunting bow.

pretty lame but then again, since you aren't an archer, you wouldn't know that .

a 300 FPS compound shooting ACC or similar GT's has a better trajectory and performs far better in wind than a 300 FPS crossbow shooting a 22/64


----------



## Jim C

cynic said:


> Jim having an engineering degree in a field unrelated to the field of discussion carries no clout. It only means he has a degree, not that he knows what he is talking about.


source is alot like a guy who spends all his time in a preppie DOJO getting pretty black belts thinking he is going into the barrio and kick the next Roberto Duran's butt in a street fight


----------



## cynic

Dang Source he has a very good point.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:



> a 300 FPS compound shooting ACC or similar GT's has a better trajectory and performs far better in wind than a 300 FPS crossbow shooting a 22/64


LOL .... now we're getting down to the physical brass tacks - I like that.

Yep. you are correct. Assuming the range is long enough to matter, smaller diameter arrows will outperform larger diameter arrows in a crosswind.

But here's where I prove you a fraud, Jim. The arrow is independent of the launching platform. In other words, a 300 FPS compound shooting ACC or similar GT's has a better trajectory and performs far better in wind than a 300 FPS compound shooting a 22/64.

There is no requirement that you shoot 22/64 from your crossbow. I see smaller diameter carbon bolts available in this years cabela's.

The PHYSICAL differnces you speak to are very minor, much smaller than the velocity advantage that most crossbows have over the typical hunting compound setup.

I think you are misleading on purpose - buts lets just agree you are mistaken.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL .... now we're getting down to the physical brass tacks - I like that.
> 
> Yep. you are correct. Assuming the range is long enough to matter, smaller diameter arrows will outperform larger diameter arrows in a crosswind.
> 
> But here's where I prove you a fraud, Jim. The arrow is independent of the launching platform. In other words, a 300 FPS compound shooting ACC or similar GT's has a better trajectory and performs far better in wind than a 300 FPS compound shooting a 22/64.
> 
> There is no requirement that you shoot 22/64 from your crossbow. I see smaller diameter carbon bolts available in this years cabela's.
> 
> The PHYSICAL differnces you speak to are very minor, much smaller than the velocity advantage that most crossbows have over the typical hunting compound setup.
> 
> I think you are misleading on purpose - buts lets just agree you are mistaken.


Again you are full of it source. The tracks on all the leading bows are designed for 22/64. 21/64 is about the thinnest you can go. As the brilliant engineer you claim to be explain what happens if you were to shoot say a 19/64 out of a bow designed for a 22/64

there is one or two trackless xbows still around. they can shoot the thinner diameter stuff-guess what-they sound like a 22 going off and they are constantly going out of tune. THat is why NO ONE uses them in competition anymore.

you always bray that crossbows have a longer effective range than compounds then you whine that at short ranges it doesn't matter about the projectiles. Guess what source-at 15 yards, it really doesn't matter much what kind of bow or arrow you use.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> you always bray that crossbows have a longer effective range than compounds then you whine that at short ranges it doesn't matter about the projectiles. Guess what source-at 15 yards, it really doesn't matter much what kind of bow or arrow you use.


Show me where I whine about short range projectiles....you are stretching the truth again.

I agree, at 15 yards it doesn't much matter what you hit them with. I have literally flipped a deer lengthwise with a slug at 15 yards (when I was kneeling and actually below the deer). Since I am a skilled enough hunter to get within 15 yards, and since you argue that the woddsmanship is 98% of the hunt, should I be allowed to hunt with you in OH archery season using my slug gun?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Show me where I whine about short range projectiles....you are stretching the truth again.
> 
> I agree, at 15 yards it doesn't much matter what you hit them with. I have literally flipped a deer lengthwise with a slug at 15 yards (when I was kneeling and actually below the deer). Since I am a skilled enough hunter to get within 15 yards, and since you argue that the woddsmanship is 98% of the hunt, should I be allowed to hunt with you in OH archery season using my slug gun?



no source because no one would call a slug gun archery and the DNR would not allow it since slug guns kill more deer in a week in OHio than all the bows kill in four months. I can shoot a slug gun three times in a second and all three slugs will hit a standard IPSC target at 75 yards (if you don't believe me maybe the copy of SWAT magazine from 1992 (Peter Neil Dayton wrote the article) where I was part of a team testing the federal "tactical loads" and the benelli M series combat shotgun is still around-I was the guy wearing the USA on the back of my vest.

I can easily hit a deer at 150 yards with a good slug gun. 

you can't do any of that with any bow. 

now stop the stupidity source-the fact is -is that a crossbow and a compound are equivalent weapons in every area that matters to objective DNR officers


----------



## thesource

Yawn - I know. I know. You've told the story at least twice before.

What if I promise to limit my shots to 30 yards or less, the way your crossbow buddies do?

Yea, I know they're lying, too, never mind.

I think a crossbow in bowseason is nearly as hideous as a a shotgun.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Yawn - I know. I know. You've told the story at least twice before.
> 
> What if I promise to limit my shots to 30 yards or less, the way your crossbow buddies do?
> 
> Yea, I know they're lying, too, never mind.
> 
> I think a crossbow in bowseason is nearly as hideous as a a shotgun.



you are again showing patent stupidity. I think a source pretending to be a hunter is almost as pathetic as Ingrid Newkirk claiming to be the same thing

I find your comment to be braindead. You already admitted crossbows wouldn't hurt the herd while a four month shotgun season would

so you are being rather moronic again


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL .... now we're getting down to the physical brass tacks - I like that.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no requirement that you shoot 22/64 from your crossbow. I see smaller diameter carbon bolts available in this years cabela's.
> 
> :



would you show me those smaller diameter crossbow bolts

I can't find them on cabela's site

http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/t...=&cmCat=MainCatcat21424&parentType=index&rid=


----------



## aceoky

*MORE on KY*

Also on the "misinformation radio show", I should mention the "other tactic" that was used....for those who may not know there is a Radio Talk show out of Lousiville where the host was a HUGE anti-crossbow guy, who used his show and "clout" to try to derail this at every chance, HE also stated " a compromise is when BOTH parties sit down TOGETHER and work out something both sides can live with" YET HE was in on the "secret compromise" Knowing that his own defintion had NOT been met!

HE then went on to actually say........IF this crossbow expansion takes place KY will be flooded with Non Resident hunters flocking to KY to kill ALL OF OUR VELVET BUCKS!!

Can anyone actually believe anyone with a radio show would go that "low", just to try to "win"???

One can gun hunt velvet bucks in SC in mid-August and still have time to hunt elsewhere, why on earth would they come and fight our heat and "skeeters" biting flies etc. to archery hunt a velvet buck.......I'd think they'd rather spend their $$$ to GUN hunt during the rut IN KY ????


----------



## Jim C

Jim C said:


> would you show me those smaller diameter crossbow bolts
> 
> I can't find them on cabela's site
> 
> http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/t...=&cmCat=MainCatcat21424&parentType=index&rid=


source I am waiting for the information on those small diameter crossbow bolts


----------



## aceoky

aceoky said:


> Marvin, first that is NOT the right data, I don't know where YOU found it(no link was provided either) or who "edited" it, but it's far from what the ACTUAL results were in 2002!
> Which btw I did see then.....that isn't even close to what they were then, "nice"
> 
> 
> 
> NOW what would be "nice", and very interesting, is to stop trying to make what the "majority of the minority" want an issue, and other trivial matters..... and actually show US some FACTS that support WHY the crossbow should NOT be allowed, yet the compound should be and is......allowed......
> 
> NOT how many of the Cornell survey's minority(less than 1/4 fwiw) said " this or that", but the fact the vast majoirty are for full expansion, it's very obvious which is relevent and which is not!
> 
> NOW the majority wish for this, some(a few at best) oppose it strongly and vocally, what I haven't seen(and none of us seem to have), is WHY......it should NOT be allowed as the majority of KY hunters want!
> 
> BTW, Marvin the GUN hunters(over 90% pay the bills and are the majority) YOUR point? It IS their decision to make, like it or not......


There I'm asking again for YOU Marvin to prove where you got that "survey", and provide a link, after seeing so much "changed" and "altered", and since I KNOW that is not the same data that I was shown in 2002, I'm interested in why you refuse to do so, but continued to act as if it were fact?? WE have all seen how things have in fact been changed to suit your side's agenda, but when you post something such as you've done, and refuse to "back it up", one must assume there is a good reason for your doing so, perhaps the archive link to the KDFWR site or some such, would suffice, (not any third party sited either), IF it's indeed the actual survey from 2002 (which again the data is not the same as it was)......why not "prove it" for everyone?

I did notice however that "survey" is now gone, that is good news......


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> There I'm asking again for YOU Marvin to prove where you got that "survey", and provide a link, after seeing so much "changed" and "altered", and since I KNOW that is not the same data that I was shown in 2002, I'm interested in why you refuse to do so, but continued to act as if it were fact?? WE have all seen how things have in fact been changed to suit your side's agenda, but when you post something such as you've done, and refuse to "back it up", one must assume there is a good reason for your doing so, perhaps the archive link to the KDFWR site or some such, would suffice, (not any third party sited either), IF it's indeed the actual survey from 2002 (which again the data is not the same as it was)......why not "prove it" for everyone?
> 
> I did notice however that "survey" is now gone, that is good news......


http://www.excaliburcrossbow.com/ph...tdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=ucbk&start=15

Enjoy Ace. Page 2 if it don't get you there. :cocktail:


----------



## Marvin

*More from that page- cheaters*

gwhilikerz



Joined: 21 Mar 2005
Posts: 11


PostPosted: Tue Mar 22, 2005 9:24 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
ComfyBear wrote:
Woody I think helping our fellow man is a great idea, however I fail to understand how an out of towner would be allowed to join and vote to support an organization in a foreign juristition. I would equate it to allowing a Canadian to vote to elect the President of the USA. I think it would only give the anti's no less ammunition than if the x-bow manufacturers donated to the cause.

I think I am correct about this. If the UCBK (the new xbow org.) can be recognised by the League of Kentucky Sportsmen then It would get two votes with the league. That would be the same number the UBK (anti-xbows) gets now. We need that recognition in order to be able to counter any moves the ubk makes inside the league. I am not all that well informed about lks/ubk/ucbk/kdfwr/legislature/ governor and how it all fits together. But I am sure a post to multidigits thru Woody could explain it very well. What i do know is that as a member of UCBK a non-resident would have an equal vote as a resident member of UCBK.


----------



## Marvin

*Heck lets post some more good stuff- cheaters*

dw wrote:
i find it pretty amazing that a state the size of kentucky can't come up with 25 people of it's own to support thier own cause.
'dw"


DW, you do make a good point. As the saying goes, "The Lord helps those who help themselves"

I'm not trying to be onery or step on any toes, but what surprises me is that they are leaving it to Woody W. (from Indiana) to try to recruit the members needed. Could it be that they are not interested in using crossbows.

If so, maybe if there's members of this forum who're from Kentucky, they can explain why. Confused
_________________


----------



## Marvin

*Tell Me ace*

How long until PETA asks to be part of the league of sportsman? Nice can of worms you opened. They have every right to be there as you do now. THANKS!!


----------



## Marvin

*Coming to a state near you*

Heck heres more for you so you don;t feel cheated.

CB,

They are working hard down in KY too and getting members too. The more the merrier..

*This is NOT just a state battle line drawn.*

Look at the BIG picture.. This battle WILL be fought in EVERY state.


Thanks R. J.
_________________
Woody Williams


----------



## aceoky

Marvin, you have not only failed to prove nothing relevent, but again I asked for the 2002 SURVEY.......NOT that, and I've told you more than enough......the UCBK WAS started by a Ky resident, WE all know that, several here in fact KNOW his name and his "handle", YOU make unfounded allegations and accusations and have to go OUTSIDE of KY forums to even get that "snippet" of what took place......

HINT: there was a great deal more involved to it then your "few posts you pasted"........ONCE again you have PROVEN what little you KNOW about anything WE have done, and instead of trying to find the TRUTH, you're more than happy with non-relevent BS.....

You sir are NOT worth my time, and I dare say anyone else's for that matter, once you learn to read and comprehend what YOU"VE read, maybe then, I'll attempt to care what you post.......as it stands NOW , however I asked YOU to back up your so called 2002 survey infor YOU posted, and I get this "drivel", 

And the fact is, the 2002 survey NEVER really mattered after WE paid for the Cornell survey, any 'thinking person" would understand that the INDEPENDENT survey results ARE what mattered......let me recap those for you

the vast MAJORITY wanted FULL EXPANSION

LESS THAN (<) 1/4 opposed expansion........YOU and yours didn't even have 25% on YOUR side IN KY




PERIOD


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin, you have not only failed to prove nothing relevent, but again I asked for the 2002 SURVEY.......NOT that, and I've told you more than enough......the UCBK WAS started by a Ky resident, WE all know that, several here in fact KNOW his name and his "handle", YOU make unfounded allegations and accusations and have to go OUTSIDE of KY forums to even get that "snippet" of what took place......
> 
> HINT: there was a great deal more involved to it then your "few posts you pasted"........ONCE again you have PROVEN what little you KNOW about anything WE have done, and instead of trying to find the TRUTH, you're more than happy with non-relevent BS.....
> 
> You sir are NOT worth my time, and I dare say anyone else's for that matter, once you learn to read and comprehend what YOU"VE read, maybe then, I'll attempt to care what you post.......as it stands NOW , however I asked YOU to back up your so called 2002 survey infor YOU posted, and I get this "drivel",
> 
> And the fact is, the 2002 survey NEVER really mattered after WE paid for the Cornell survey, any 'thinking person" would understand that the INDEPENDENT survey results ARE what mattered......let me recap those for you
> 
> the vast MAJORITY wanted FULL EXPANSION
> 
> LESS THAN (<) 1/4 opposed expansion........YOU and yours didn't even have 25% on YOUR side IN KY
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PERIOD



What? You got what you asked for. suck it up and quit whining. :baby: :baby: Its pretty clear from the thread on excalibur what was going on. they even posted about it. there is always more to the story with you. Lame excuse. come up with something new.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> How long until PETA asks to be part of the league of sportsman? Nice can of worms you opened. They have every right to be there as you do now. THANKS!!


YOU have NO clue about what YOU speak (nothing new there again)

I asked for a LINK TO THE KDFWR (not to any forums) proving THAT was in FACT the correct data, I'll be waiting.....(at least some relevent link that I know couldn't have been "altered" by someone who's purpose it may serve)........ 

Even at that, that "survey"(though now 100% not relevent with the Cornell data, and it being done last, shows what Ky says NOW)........YOU failed to prove anything to help your cause and in fact hurt it even more(though I doubt that IS possible)


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> What? You got what you asked for. suck it up and quit whining. :baby: :baby: Its pretty clear from the thread on excalibur what was going on. they even posted about it. there is always more to the story with you. Lame excuse. come up with something new.


YOU "suck it up" dude! I have nothing to or need to do so.....here it is again for you cry and whine all YOU want to...

YOU and YOURS are not even ONE IN FIVE IN KY!!

NOW you deal with that fact..........

AND THESE as well

*Bow hunters*, however, were *more likely *to feel that hunter recruitment and retention would improve with an expanded crossbow season (85% vs. 77% non-bow hunters). 

).* Bow hunters *were also more supportive of expanding both deer and turkey hunting season,* even for other types of weapons* (63% vs. 46% non-bow hunters). 

NOW YOU deal with those FACTS


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> YOU "suck it up" dude! I have nothing to or need to do so.....here it is again for you cry and whine all YOU want to...
> 
> YOU and YOURS are not even ONE IN FIVE IN KY!!
> 
> NOW you deal with that fact..........
> 
> AND THESE as well
> 
> *Bow hunters*, however, were *more likely *to feel that hunter recruitment and retention would improve with an expanded crossbow season (85% vs. 77% non-bow hunters).
> 
> ).* Bow hunters *were also more supportive of expanding both deer and turkey hunting season,* even for other types of weapons* (63% vs. 46% non-bow hunters).
> 
> NOW YOU deal with those FACTS



Where is your link to back up these supposive facts cheaters.


----------



## Marvin

Can understand how you can't hit such a meat pitch? I send you your requested link, you say its wrong but don't have the stones or at least try to post a link showing me what one of your very own posted was wrong? Willie is nto going to be happy with you. Oh and one more thing ace. Go see what bigturdVA is doing on bowsite...whoring his opinion in states that he doesn;t even reside. sounds like you have an image problem stating thats what were doing. maybe you can go to TNdeer and they will give you the link oh great one.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin *please *stop with the insults and obvious attempts to get good information threads locked or deleted, thank you!


----------



## Marvin

*Provide the Link*



aceoky said:


> Marvin *please *stop with the insults and obvious attempts to get good information threads locked or deleted, thank you!


*Cheater* ... good information.....what a laugh. You must feel like a nun with her clothes off. When does PETA get the chance to sit at the table with you and the rest of the hunters in KY? Anti bowhunter


----------



## aceoky

Marvin are you a spoiled kid or what? I asked nicely that getting me "nowhere fast" how is this for you??

The LINKS are posted that information is from the Cornell survey, a "thinking person" would have realized that right away, as much as it's been posted.......you obviously have NOTHING to add, and NO facts nor any data to support ANYTHING you post, so insult away, I have NO stake in YOUR "opinion" of me nor do I care........accept THIS FACT we are winning!!

YOU and yours are losing this whole thing.......and YOU and YOURS are the "anti-bowhunters"..........YOU all claim to be "helping bowhunging" but get a CLUE.........YOU and yours have done NOTHING POSITIVE........that I've seen and seeing your many insult filled posts I must come to the conclusion that you like division and to argue rather than to debate..............YOU keep accusing ME of "hiding" wonder where you've been for days?? Busy? Well guess what I have a life too, I would NEVER hide from the likes of your "little group", YOU and yours have NOTHING that "scares me", and certainly YOU and YOURS have NO facts or data to use, which you prove at every chance........it's a VERY weak position to *attempt* to "put down' one's opponent in a debate , instead of a "counter" with FACTS AND DATA......

WEAK minds use WEAK tacticts, so WE all know which you and yours belong to.........thanks for "clearing that up", 

NOW PLEASE either leave out the personal insults or leave my thread alone........


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin are you a spoiled kid or what? I asked nicely that getting me "nowhere fast" how is this for you??
> 
> The LINKS are posted that information is from the Cornell survey, a "thinking person" would have realized that right away, as much as it's been posted.......you obviously have NOTHING to add, and NO facts nor any data to support ANYTHING you post, so insult away, I have NO stake in YOUR "opinion" of me nor do I care........accept THIS FACT we are winning!!
> 
> YOU and yours are losing this whole thing.......and YOU and YOURS are the "anti-bowhunters"..........YOU all claim to be "helping bowhunging" but get a CLUE.........YOU and yours have done NOTHING POSITIVE........that I've seen and seeing your many insult filled posts I must come to the conclusion that you like division and to argue rather than to debate..............YOU keep accusing ME of "hiding" wonder where you've been for days?? Busy? Well guess what I have a life too, I would NEVER hide from the likes of your "little group", YOU and yours have NOTHING that "scares me", and certainly YOU and YOURS have NO facts or data to use, which you prove at every chance........it's a VERY weak position to *attempt* to "put down' one's opponent in a debate , instead of a "counter" with FACTS AND DATA......
> 
> WEAK minds use WEAK tacticts, so WE all know which you and yours belong to.........thanks for "clearing that up",
> 
> NOW PLEASE either leave out the personal insults or leave my thread alone........



Hold up a second cheater, you leave when the heats gets turned up. I leave when when I want. Big difference cheater. One of teh biggest insulters of tehm all is on your side. Police your own ranks first cheater. Oh wait..you can't do that in your world. Everybody has to have a say. I will ask again.

WHEN does PETA get to sit at the table too. You said the info I posted was bogus( cry fould) and wanted a link. I provide and you go to another study. Classic bait and switch cheater. Jim trained us well.


----------



## thesource

Marvin - 

You posting the excalibur stuff shows very clearly what happened in KY as non-residents railroaded the KY process.

Thanks for putting it out there where everyone can see how dirty the UCBK really is.


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> Marvin -
> 
> You posting the excalibur stuff shows very clearly what happened in KY as non-residents railroaded the KY process.
> 
> Thanks for putting it out there where everyone can see how dirty the UCBK really is.


 I bet the sportsman of Kentucky Cannot wait until Peta gets as much a say as the UCBK. They are going to love that. We will be sure to tell them Ace let them in. There is so much more its disgusting.


----------



## thesource

Clearly what the UCBK did was not above board.

Using nonresidents and canadians to form a club and subvert the will of the KY sportsmen was bogus.

Thanks again for shining the blinding light of truth on their unethical tactics.


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> Clearly what the UCBK did was not above board.
> 
> Using nonresidents and canadians to form a club and subvert the will of the NY sportsmen was bogus.
> 
> Thanks again for shining the blinding light of truth on their unethical tactics.


You mean KY sports right source....I heard your on top of things there...wasn't sure it was spreading your way....


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> I bet the sportsman of Kentucky Cannot wait until Peta gets as much a say as the UCBK. They are going to love that. We will be sure to tell them Ace let them in. There is so much more its disgusting.


First that is not likely to EVER happen, and IF it did, it would have NOTHING to do with ME OR the UCBK......WE didn't change ANY rules NOT ONE>>>>>>get that fact??

As for you telling anyone anything, be "my guest" with your outstanding way with people, I'm so certain that every single one would believe you ......btw. be sure to bring source along, he can only help you cause........

The inability of some to discuss and or debate without being childish is amazing and amusing to me.......

AS for "the heat", IF you had the ability to "think" or "reason" you'd by now KNOW that you and yours have NONE.......0.........nadda.............Zilch........takes FACTS to apply "heat" to me when I have so many on MY side......again the more you post the more I realize you are "unarmed" in a "battle of wits".........NOT "heat" that makes me NOT care........it's the "level" of those who oppose my position.........they are not worth the trouble all too often, in FACT they(that would be you two btw) ARE their OWN worst enemies........why should I bother when you two do such a great job of harming yourselves AND your "causes"??????

So in summary Marvin, you of little "wits" about you........ I don't "run" from you or yours.......there is NO need for me to do so; YOU have nothing.....never have had, likely never will.......  

For you to even make that statement as much as I HAVE posted shows everyone how "shallow" and "unbalanced" you really are.........in truth, you're just as "sad" as source is.........I'm not even "flattered" you miss me!!:cocktail: 


Try this (IF you want any credibility, though it's likely much too late), leave out the insults(hard as that is for you to do), AND replace them with something worth reading, THEN see how much I respond....otherwise YOU are like the rattle in a dash............not worth the trouble to bother with, but still annoying!


----------



## thesource

Marvin said:


> You mean KY sports right source....I heard your on top of things there...wasn't sure it was spreading your way....


Yup - must have been a freudian slip.... silly me


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> First that is not likely to EVER happen, and IF it did, it would have NOTHING to do with ME OR the UCBK......WE didn't change ANY rules NOT ONE>>>>>>get that fact??


Aceoky, you are being too modest.

You gave every antihunting group in the nation a BLUPRINT on how to cheat there way into the LKS and get their 2 votes. Now they know they don't even need citizens of KY to do it!

You deserve all the credit.....enjoy the limelight.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Clearly what the UCBK did was not above board.
> 
> Using nonresidents and canadians to form a club and subvert the will of the NY sportsmen was bogus.
> 
> Thanks again for shining the blinding light of truth on their unethical tactics.


Yeah thanks for showing US all how ignorant YOU both are on KY !!:darkbeer: :darkbeer: 

IF YOU can actually prove that happened (so far you have posted threads from forums ASKING FOR MEMBERS) THEN you still have NOTHING.........SEVERAL clubs In KY were doing the same thing........shall I bring that up.........OR how about what P&Y did down here........HOW is that any differenet it is NOT and you would know that IF you could think beyond two seconds.........

Also I HAVE POSTED THE FACTS on what the KY hunters wanted to TRY to change that to "subvert the will" is insane(but expected from you source)...........

I think though I will talk to a couple of Ky LAWYERS in the UCBK, though and see what they say about making you back up or PAY for you slandering US on every chance and IN PUBLIC.......how's that sound

So keep it up, it just may make your $$$ go away, just as fast as that.............


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Aceoky, you are being too modest.
> 
> You gave every antihunting group in the nation a BLUPRINT on how to cheat there way into the LKS and get their 2 votes. Now they know they don't even need citizens of KY to do it!
> 
> You deserve all the credit.....enjoy the limelight.


Such a STUPID statement, that I won't even explain why IT IS........

YOU are NO doubt though an "expert" on antihunting groups using all their tactics so often.......still an unbeliveably stupid statement that you two are making.......but you "think" you know so much live in your ignorance, I don't even care.........you two deserve each other.......I know a movie title that comes to mind right now in fact!!:darkbeer: :darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> So keep it up, it just may make your $$$ go away, just as fast as that.............


ANOTHER threat?  Don't you learn anything from your mistakes?


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> IF YOU can actually prove that happened (so far you have posted threads from forums ASKING FOR MEMBERS) THEN you still have NOTHING.........SEVERAL clubs In KY were doing the same thing.......



eeeeeeewwww .... yucky.

If I can prove it (boy, that already sounds guilty)

The other guys were doing it (so its ok for you to be unethical if someone else is?)

Bluck. The whole thing is dirty....with a capital D.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> ANOTHER threat?  Don't you learn anything from your mistakes?


"another" implies more than one, I have not ever made a threat on here nor any other forum.....period.....I have ONLY been accused of it once....but considering the source of that false accusation, it no longer even bothers me.....

YOU take that any way YOU wish to take it........FACT YOU TWO are NOW slandering a GROUP OF HUNTERS as an org making FALSE ACCUSATIONS that I know for a fact YOU can NOT back up............

IF YOU and Marvin "think" WE will sit by and do nothing.....keep it up........we will see how your bank account "fairs"........

I've asked NICELY *several times* for both of you to NOT slander the UCBK (matter of public record right here) 

This will be the very last time I ASK

PLEASE do NOT speak "ill" of our club...... IF you don't agree with what we "stand for" (ALL HUNTERS) then that's fine.........I don't agree with P&Y, but I don't continue to make false accusations about them.......they offer NOTHING of interest to me......end of story......and that's where I leave it, other than to say........many others feel the same way.......

I would expect that you two COULD manage to discuss or even debate these issues without having to slander the UCBK.......and I expect that you will do just that.......


----------



## thesource

its not slander if its true.

Marvin has publicly documented the recruitment of NR and aliens for your club. 

It was explicitly stated in those posts that you needed to round up 25 members for your club to get your seat on LKS.

The "I'm in" posts can be retrieved and recorded.

By the way, you have officially threatened me twice and Free Range once (resulting in a locked thread - Primitive Archery Season thread, since you are so into "facts.") I suggest you stop that, since it is against forum rules.


----------



## aceoky

RATTLE , RATTLE ,RATTLE

a noise in the dash.........both of you


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> its not slander if its true.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> YOU two have made SEVERAL allegations that are NOT true.....so......what? Among them.....(but NOT limited to)
> 
> 
> 
> You gave every antihunting group in the nation a BLUPRINT on how to cheat there way into the LKS and get their 2 votes. Now they know they don't even need citizens of KY to do it!
> 
> YOU prove that IS fact then.......although THAT is ONLY the beginning of your and Marvins problems and let me explain, BY LAW YOU two will be KNOWN for who YOU ARE in "real life".......Every place HAS to disclose WHO YOU ARE....(including your ISP s) Want to "test" my FACTS NOW??
> 
> IF that IS true PROVE it's true........YOU can't I know why YOU don't.........deal with it
> 
> Marvin has publicly documented the recruitment of NR and aliens for your club.
> 
> FIRST, NO he has NOT......second IS Wilie an OFFICER of the UCBK, was the THEN???
> 
> So IOW, NOW according to YOU MEMBER"S actions are the responsiblity of the club........I WILL happily forward to the P&Y club what YOU have said........and see IF you are even a member...........
> 
> IOW *unless* Woody is an officer YOU HAVE NOTHING(and he's not now nor ever was) END of story
> 
> It was explicitly stated in those posts that you needed to round up 25 members for your club to get your seat on LKS.
> 
> SO what??
> 
> The "I'm in" posts can be retrieved and recorded.
> 
> Again SO WHAT .....unless YOU can prove ANY rules were broken(and YOU can't) it's NOTHING
> 
> By the way, you have officially threatened me twice and Free Range once
> 
> PROVE THAT
> 
> (resulting in a locked thread - Primitive Archery Season thread, since you are so into "facts.") I suggest you stop that, since it is against forum rules.


Then I have to ask, why am I not banned, IF I did such....

Obvious answer I didn't do it.........

YOU have NO problem stretching the truth(and I"m being nice here) YOU said *I* threatened you twice and FR once.......PROVE IT or DROP IT....

I KNOW I DIDN"T 

But *please * Continue with YOUR "charade" YOU help US more than *I* EVER could!!!


----------



## aceoky

Let me explain this in "plain language" EVEN you two can understand.......

IF you post one more thing about the UCBK......you'd best hope it will hold up in a civil proceeding .....fair enough??

YOU want to TRY TO slander me? go for it......YOUR opinion means LESS than nothing to me( negative 0 plus)........

HOWEVER.........IF YOU TWO continue to TRY slander the UCBK....(with YOUR LIES) we shall soon see where that leads........wanna "go there" YOUR choice....

I'll even say it one MORE time...............show us all where an OFFICER did what YOU claim IF you can't(and we know YOU can't) it's "over" for YOU two........."get it"???

IOW............even IF you two can show that "members" did something YOU don't agree with, that IS a "far cry" from saying the UCBK as a "whole " did it..........

I trust you are both "smart enough" to know what I just said????????


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> See: OHIO
> 
> 120,000 stringunners (including Twogun and JimC)
> 80,000 bowhunters
> 
> THAT is the definition of overrun!!


ONCE again YOU and YOURS shows what it IS really about......SHARING........see "source" (as IF) 

MOST REAL hunters would see 200,000 BOWHUNTERS AND/OR ARCHERS!!!

YOU and YOURS see 120,000 NOT YOU TWO!!;

THAT alone is TOO FUNNY!!:darkbeer: :darkbeer: 

*I* am so glad you and Marvin are on the same side!!

(otherwise ONE of you may have been on mine) Shh......(that's a secret, and with their "combined even" reading comprehension" no problem) :wink: :tongue:


----------



## thesource

Aceoky - 

I'm tired of you threatening everyone who's opinion differs from yours.

I will use PM's to discuss this with the moderators and get back yo you.


----------



## Jim C

aceoky said:


> Let me explain this in "plain language" EVEN you two can understand.......
> 
> IF you post one more thing about the UCBK......you'd best hope it will hold up in a civil proceeding .....fair enough??
> 
> YOU want to TRY TO slander me? go for it......YOUR opinion means LESS than nothing to me( negative 0 plus)........
> 
> HOWEVER.........IF YOU TWO continue to TRY slander the UCBK....(with YOUR LIES) we shall soon see where that leads........wanna "go there" YOUR choice....
> 
> I'll even say it one MORE time...............show us all where an OFFICER did what YOU claim IF you can't(and we know YOU can't) it's "over" for YOU two........."get it"???
> 
> IOW............even IF you two can show that "members" did something YOU don't agree with, that IS a "far cry" from saying the UCBK as a "whole " did it..........
> 
> I trust you are both "smart enough" to know what I just said????????


lets ratchet down the threats of suits. ITs not helpful Ace-make the good points that we know the source cannot refute and let his spinning tarnish his own side


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> lets ratchet down the threats of suits. ITs not helpful Ace-make the good points that we know the source cannot refute and let his spinning tarnish his own side



Yeah, I know, it just gets real old that they have nothing and always resort to insults and false accusations, they had NO right nor reason to state the misinformaiton on the UCBK, I've asked them nicely, you see where that went and how well.........NOW I'm yet again being falsely accused of "threats".......

NOT ONE shred of credible eveidence on one little thing they've said........that IS all they have, I'd think it would be better to not comment than to keep that up, I'd like for these threads to remain so others might learn, it's obvious to me they are trying to get them locked or deleted.....


----------



## Jim C

what is funny is whining about say people like me (who have hunting rights and in laws with land in KY) supporting common sense anti-apartheid rules in KY while Poop and Dung and the Odious PBS uses membership money from around the country to wage jihad against xbows in that same state


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> what is funny is whining about say people like me (who have hunting rights and in laws with land in KY) supporting common sense anti-apartheid rules in KY while Poop and Dung and the Odious PBS uses membership money from around the country to wage jihad against xbows in that same state


The classic "double standard"!

Yes it is! But somehow it's "fine" for these groups to recruit and accept members from anywhere in the world, but IF we're even accused of doing so, even though NOT one officer has been proven to do something WE(the UCBK) are "unethicaL" etc. according to them........ 

I KNOW you're correct, and in hindsight I should have never said that part (I'd delete it but I can't now).......

I just kinda "lost my cool" over them repeating the misinformation as IF they have any clue of the truth, and it's "not right" to attack a new club that is being built for ALL of Ky hunters, NOT only those "elite" hunters who "think" they're "entitled", and/or "special", I've seen what these small groups have done and will do EVEN against their own membership's votes in at least one case!!


What really "got to me", was instead of using relevent facts and data to try to dispute things, it's been their "MO" to attack ME personally, the UCBK (which their whole source of information is some forum posts by members.......no one can "control" what a member posts or doesn't post, and yet that is NO reflection on what the UCBK IS all about , or what it's trying to do......for ALL KY hunters.....I trust the knew this, but still continued after being asked nicely to not insult our org........sad and pathetic, but again, 

I was very wrong to take it to that level, and I apologize for doing so.....


----------



## Free Range

Ace you need to take a break from here, you’re really losing touch with reality. Yes you did threaten people, in fact you, just a couple post back threatened a law suite. And I haven’t read every post by Marvin, but the ones I did, he provided quotes and references as to who said what. It is clear that an out of state person did a lot to help get the UBKC started and was actively recruiting out of state people to join. That cannot be denied, is that a good thing or bad? I personally don’t think a state organization should be allowing NR’s to be that big of a voice but that is just me, there is nothing unlawful about it as far as I know. That is not the same as not allowing NR’s to become members, there are plenty of state bowhunting organizations that have NR members, the CBA has plenty. NR’s like to support those states that they hunt in, or might hunt in. And being a member, could get a person contacts to good hunting areas and or information.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> it's "not right" to attack a new club that is being built for ALL of Ky hunters, NOT only those "elite" hunters who "think" they're "entitled", and/or "special"



LOL. You mean except for those ""elite" hunters who "think" they're "entitled", and/or "special", don't you.

It is a complete and entire joke to say the UCBK stands for all hunters when you do not allow dissenting opinion in your club. You are excluding those with a different opinion, just as you whimper and screech about being excluded from P&Y.


By the way, for both you and Jim.....P&Y and NABC are international organizations.

Of course they have members from various states and countries. 

But a club with KY in its name should be formed mostly of KY sportsmen, dontcha think? And its obvious from what's been posted it was recruited and formed around NR and Canadian xbowers to sneak into the LKS and cancel out the KBA votes. Its not illegal....just unethical.

If you had named your club the International Crossbow Hunters, your initial membership would have been legal and ethical - of course that more accurate label wouldn't get you on the LKS with votes to cancel KBA, which was the real objective.

Stop whining.


----------



## Free Range

> LOL. You mean except for those ""elite" hunters who "think" they're "entitled", and/or "special", don't you.
> 
> It is a complete and entire joke to say the UCBK stands for all hunters when you do not allow dissenting opinion in your club. You are excluding those with a different opinion, just as you whimper and screech about being excluded from P&Y.


And it doesn’t stand for gun hunter extending their season into archery season, either, so I guess it only stands for all hunters that hunt in a manner that is consistent with the UCBK’s agenda?


----------



## aceoky

First, YES Woody is a MEMBER of the UCBK, WE are proud to have him aboard, he lives in Indiana, hunts in Indiana AND KY.........and so what???

Secondly NO club is responsible for the actions of their membership, what was NOT shown was (again) officers doing any of that, as IF it matters anyway.....

I'll say this ONE more time, then you guys keep "bashing" all you want.........the UCBK IS MADE UP by a large MAJORITY OF KY hunters NOT NR.........

AS a PRIVATE club we can and will allow whom we wish and NOT allow those we don't want........our RIGHT to do so, and we intend to exercise that right.......so deal with that....

FR, NOT being a member what right do YOU have to speak for what the UCBK stands for or does NOT stand for???

FACT what we've had here is a bunch of people spouting off pure BS that they have NO clue about, or proof of.......

ONE MORE TIME..........IF you can show 20 Canadians(you can't btw), that proves NOTHING.......you have NO idea, how many members we have or had, or will have.........at best you're all guessing what is "what", I however am not.......I KNOW.......

The SAD fact IS had the UCB and KBA NOT tried to force their will upon the rest of us, NONE of this would even be a part of this "discussion", so why NOT place the blame where it belongs???

HOW many here think a 300 member organazation should try to DICTATE to the rest of Ky hunters what is or should be allowed???

FACT: that IS exactly what happened, thus we came into being to insure that NEVER happens again.......don't like it, I don't care....one bit.........

WE (the UCBK) NEVER broke rule one, we didn't do anything that hasn't been done before, to blame us(or try to) is to blame too many other orgs in Ky and elsewhere......

AS ALWAYS, you few are 100% about division, at any and all cost...........period

NONE of that matters anyway!!

What DOES matter is the vast majority in KY who support FULL EXPANSION who with even the support of the KDFWR were "robbed" by a FEW vocal, organized people using VERY underhanded tactics which WERE "new" and NOT needed in the first place...........

WHY didn't they file an appeal??? 

WHY did they LIE about the Regs NOT being filed on time on a radio show(that reaches a great many people btw)?? When IN FACT those regs were filed for over a month before that show aired...........

NOW IF you're actually interested in "ethical".........that would be a couple good places to start..........oh Yeah, these were done by YOUR side, so you won't admit how foolish that makes you look....... 

As for the "threat" of a lawsuit, first it was NO threat, secondly, I apologized for bringing it up.......

SOME people just can't stop...with the insults , attacks, etc.

HERE again......

I apolgize for the lawsuit statement, I "lost my cool" over the lies and insults about our club, and I overreacted, for that I sincerely apologize to ALL .......

NOW I expect that to NOT be brought up again, all anyone can do is admit a mistake, and apologize for making it........

EDIT to add:

HERE is the first time before it being mentioned yet again

"I was very wrong to take it to that level, and I apologize for doing so....."


----------



## Free Range

> FR, NOT being a member what right do YOU have to speak for what the UCBK stands for or does NOT stand for???


It was an assumption I made. Do you want gun season to expand into archery season? Because if you do I will apologize for my wrong assumption.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> It was an assumption I made. Do you want gun season to expand into archery season? Because if you do I will apologize for my wrong assumption.


A very stupid question and here is why....

WE are talking KY here so (again)

OUR archery season starts Sept 3 and ends Jan 16 SO all deer gun seasons are ALREADY in "archery season" (at least in your "thinking").......WHEN else would they be, and YES since you asked, I have NO good reason to oppose some extra days, IF

A.) the Dept decided they're needed, and/or
B.) KY Hunters want them, AND the KDFWR does the studies and shows no harm to the herd, will happen

Having said all of that, *I* am not the UCBK, and WE would take a membership vote AND go "from there" with what our members wanted, NOT what *I* or any one or two want.........as it should be (but wasn't in some Ky bowhunting orgs, according to some of their FORMER members, who left because the majority's votes were NOT "cared about", WE don't intend to make that mistake) so unless it comes to a vote, I can't say for certain how the UCBK would "stand"........and YOU certainly can't.......fwiw:cocktail: 

Here is what YOU said

"And it doesn’t stand for gun hunter extending their season into archery season, either, so I guess it only stands for all hunters that hunt in a manner that is consistent with the UCBK’s agenda?"

YOU obviously either didn't read our Mission Statement, OR did and still posted that......misinformation

Since that has not been an issue as of yet, we have had NO vote it's impossible to back up your false statement!


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> It was an assumption I made. Do you want gun season to expand into archery season? Because if you do I will apologize for my wrong assumption.



why do the advocates of archery apartheid seem unable to tell the difference between crossbows-which are clearly part of archery and firearms? Is it because they can't debate or is it because they have to create facades and strawmen to hide the greed that really motivates the "we got ours but your bow isn't allowed" BS?


----------



## aceoky

BTW, ALL of Ky's hunting season fall in "there" somewhere with the exceptions of

Spring Turkey and spring bushytails..

....all bird seasons, rabbits, waterfowl, etc.etc.etc........easy to see how little merit that question has in reality.........

BTW the UCBK supports ALL KY hunters(not just crossbows fwiw) had you bothered to look you'd know that *fact*.....


----------



## doctariAFC

I see some things just never change....

Play nice, or don't play. :nono:


----------



## Free Range

> OUR archery season starts Sept 3 and ends Jan 16 SO all deer gun seasons are ALREADY in "archery season" (at least in your "thinking").......WHEN else would they be, and YES since you asked, I have NO good reason to oppose some extra days, IF
> 
> A.) the Dept decided they're needed, and/or
> B.) KY Hunters want them, AND the KDFWR does the studies and shows no harm to the herd, will happen


Well I must apologize then, because it does seams that one member of the UCBK, is all for gun season expanding into archery season. There you go folks, exactly what Thesource and I have been saying, one gun hunter, and it appears one x-bow advocate doesn’t really care about bow season. Not only will they take it over with x-bows, given the chance they would gladly let gun hunters invade it too. 

Now that, that is out of the way, how about this one, *should he be allowed to hunt from his bed, when he can no longer make the trip to the field? *


----------



## Free Range

> why do the advocates of archery apartheid seem unable to tell the difference between crossbows-which are clearly part of archery and firearms? Is it because they can't debate or is it because they have to create facades and strawmen to hide the greed that really motivates the "we got ours but your bow isn't allowed" BS?


Because letting one weapon type invade bow season is no different then letting any other. Not that hard to understand. Why do you keep trying to compare the compound to the x-bow. If the x-bow is worthy to be in bow season, then it should stand on its own merits, not the LCD theory where you must take the most advanced compound and gadgets and try to say, “see there isn’t much difference”.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Because letting one weapon type invade bow season is no different then letting any other. Not that hard to understand. Why do you keep trying to compare the compound to the x-bow. If the x-bow is worthy to be in bow season, then it should stand on its own merits, not the LCD theory where you must take the most advanced compound and gadgets and try to say, “see there isn’t much difference”.


letting another type of bow "invade" bow season (as the compounds did three decades ago-almost driving off trad bows) is hardly the same as NON ARCHERY weapons all of which have huge advantages over bows.

You all know there is a big difference but your pathetic arguments are so lame you have to stick with this nonsense. Crossbows already stand on their own merits in places like ohio


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Well I must apologize then, because it does seams that one member of the UCBK, is all for gun season expanding into archery season.
> 
> 
> 
> Here is exactly what I said :"I have NO good reason to oppose *some extra days*, *IF*
> A.) the Dept decided they're needed, and/or (hasn't happened)
> B.) KY Hunters want them, AND the KDFWR does the studies and shows no harm to the herd, will happen(hasn't happened)
> 
> 
> 
> There you go folks, exactly what Thesource and I have been saying, one gun hunter, and it appears one x-bow advocate doesn’t really care about bow season. Not only will they take it over with x-bows, given the chance they would gladly let gun hunters invade it too.
> 
> Nice "spin" once again, a few extra days IF, is NOT what you're saying that I said, as I have proven, the IF ....being the "operative word" NOW for that IF to ever maybe happen, it would mean enough archery deer are NOT being taken doe in fact (IOW, IF the full expansion is NOT allowed, then YES, I MIGHT consider it, and have NO good reason to oppose it,AND since it's NOT happend it was "hypothetical" so nice try no cigar again


NOW where are the FACTS AND DATA SHOWING The "WHY" a compound is allowed, but a crossbow shouldn't be??:cocktail:


----------



## Jim C

aceoky said:


> NOW where are the FACTS AND DATA SHOWING The "WHY" a compound is allowed, but a crossbow shouldn't be??:cocktail:



THERE ARE NONE-the archery apartheiders can't exclude compounds though many of the PBS bigots and the compton Klanners would like to-that would get them stomped.


----------



## aceoky

cynic said:


> Archers, not including crossbow hunters, killed 17,291 deer. The 2005 bow kill was up 8% from the 16,055 deer taken by archers in 2003. The bow kill comprised 8% of the total deer kill.
> 
> *So even with the inclusion of the xbow, overall the non xbow hunters satisfaction/percentages increased. So now the question arises that has been tabled so many times."how does any persons choice to hunt with a xbow affect another hunters hunt?" clearly with higher harvest rates one can see it does not.*


That's VA DATA btw......

There you go , more of the "non-existant" data that you claim to NOT exist FR.........NOW WE have PROVEN, the crossBOW does, recruit, and retain hunters AND they do NOT affect the non-crossbow archery hunters.........

Whatcha got for us Free Range(ONLY facts and data that support YOUR claims WILL be responded to from this point forward...I hope):wink: 

You said we didn't have ANY, we've proven that claim wrong(and all of your others as well) :cocktail: :darkbeer: :cocktail: :darkbeer: 

NOW I want to see that data you claim to have, again, NOT your opinions, or what our data means, it's clear that we can read, and most can easily understand we have proven our side's claims have merit........YOUR turn to do the exact same thing!


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Ace, I guess you’re right some would rather not debate with facts.
> 
> For the forth time if you will just post one of these facts you claim to have we, COULD, debate the facts. But even after I have asked four times, you refuse to provide any facts for your case.
> If that is your wish to not provide those here with the facts supporting x-bow expansion, that’s fine with me, things should become more civil now that you are not going to be here calling us snob, selfish and greedy.


YOUR turn..........now do the same.......


----------



## Free Range

Not until we finish exploring your facts. SHould he be allowed to hunt, very simple yes or no question.


----------



## Free Range

Ok one, from 1999 to 2004 archery deer hunters dropped by 7269 in WI


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Ok one, from 1999 to 2004 archery deer hunters dropped by 7269 in WI


OK no way to verify that posted, and no way to prove it's because of the crossbow, BUT, it's "funny" you'd post that after asking "why is more archery hunters better"......

I've shown 9,300 NEW archery hunters........

And NO , again, I'm not interested in your "thoughts"(or your "examining the facts" in your opinion etc) on the data or "silly questions", 

I am interested in relevent data that supports YOUR views on why the compound should be allowed and the crossbow excluded.....no more no less......


----------



## Free Range

Another fact in Wi from 1999 to 2004 "hunter" numbers, those that bought a small game license dropped by 23581.


----------



## aceoky

Well, that's an interesting fact, but it is not relelvent to why a compound should be allowed and not a crossbow......small game......sad, and not "good" overall, but not what we're looking for ......


----------



## thesource

Here's a fact - UCBK will not allow anyone with a dissenting opinion to speak their mind.

It's good to be king....or dictator. You do not speak for all KY sportsmen. You speak for those who see it your way. Rather exclusionary, if you ask me....LOL.:darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

Well a "King" is a dictator, and I don't think you even made a point, I am certain you provided no relevent facts or data either......


----------



## thesource

Actually, a king is a monarch, not a dictator.....but you always play fast and loose with the facts.

Take your "facts" on GA. You highlight the part that says here is data from GA, then you skip the data (which is the raw harvest numbers) and then claim that the "senior biologists" interpretation of that data is data.

Very dishonest. Some would consider it cheating.

It doesn't surprise me ..... I rather expect this behavior from the pro crossbow spinners.


----------



## aceoky

Saddam called himself president, he WAS a dictator.....was there a point? :wink: 

I'll be honest I never understood the difference in a "monarch" and a dictator, except that one is a type of butterfly:cocktail: 

There you go again with false accusations, it SAYS DATA, it SAYS SUMMARY......what part of those two words don't you understand?? 

NO place at all does it infer even that ALL of the data is there, (that would be what makes it a SUMMARY btw) :darkbeer: 

I'll be happy to compare factual posts with you IF that is what you wish........

The GA Summary is proof.....it's FACT........it's full of DATA.......that is the real point........ONE other real point...... I posted ALL of the RELEVENT facts and data.....as I stated I would , your attempt to change that with false claims and accusations are too funny!!

IT's *much more * than we've seen from "your side".....as far as facts and data to support any of your "reasons" why compounds are allowed, crossbows shouldn't be


----------



## thesource

No.

I gave you data with the VA statisitics.

You gave statistics, and then an interpretation. Here's a hint for the logically challenged out there....

when you see "setimate" and must make some assumptions" .... that's NOT data. Duh.


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> why do the advocates of archery apartheid seem unable to tell the difference between crossbows-which are clearly part of archery and firearms? Is it because they *can't debate [/B or is it because they have to create facades and strawmen to hide the greed that really motivates the "we got ours but your bow isn't allowed" BS?*


*

YES to all, and here is the proof!

See his "response " to me to show you how he "thinks" things work.....

Here it is........

Quote:
OUR archery season starts Sept 3 and ends Jan 16 SO all deer gun seasons are ALREADY in "archery season" (at least in your "thinking").......WHEN else would they be, and YES since you asked, I have NO good reason to oppose some extra days, IF


A.) the Dept decided they're needed, and/or
B.) KY Hunters want them, AND the KDFWR does the studies and shows no harm to the herd, will happen 


Well I must apologize then, because it does seams that one member of the UCBK,{ is all for gun season expanding into archery season}. There you go folks, exactly what Thesource and I have been saying,{ one gun hunter, and it appears one x-bow advocate doesn’t really care about bow season. Not only will they take it over with x-bows, given the chance they would gladly let gun hunters invade it too}. 

To try to "twist" my answer to suit his purpose, note how he left our the IF parts(and the season structure; decided that I am a gun hunter, as many times as I've stated I hunt mostly with a bow....and have proven it on the Ky forum where he's no doubt seen my bow kills posted) and posted what HE wanted me to say, NOT what I did......that is why.......it suits his agenda to do that type stuff, anyone who is looking can easily see through it....

I clearly said NOT oppose..............IF

Wonder how that part got left out? 

I guess when you have NO facts or data to provide to prove your case or support your views that is all you can do??? 

It's funny even with my quote right there how it got changed, from what I said to what he "thought" I meant to say(or something else other than what I actually said)......*


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> No.
> 
> I gave you data with the VA statisitics.
> 
> You gave statistics, and then an _interpretation_. NopeHere's a hint for the logically challenged out there....
> 
> when you see "setimate" and must make some assumptions" .... that's NOT data. Duh.


NO.......btw I'm not at all "logically challenged" I do however KNOW what summary means........

Here you go again, NOW pay close attention here: "OK"??


*Summary from Nick Nicholson/Georgia Senior Wildlife Biologist *

Archery Deer Hunters - 111,682 (+14,290 from 2002-2003 ) Guess in your opinion that is an "assumption"???

How about THIS then?

The following is *data from the state of Georgia *on the first two season where crossbows were legal 

Assumption there ? NO it's DATA as it says.......FACT IS it's only a "summary" 

HERE is the proof.......(just for you)

This is a *summary of our results*. 

A complete copy of the final report will be* available soon*


I gave the DATA and FACTS as they were presented by the SENIOR Wildlife Biologist from GA (quoted him by name in fact) AT NO time did I offer anything or opinions on it when posted unless noted as such(and I'm quite certain I didn't add anything at all even at that, again though IF I did, I noted it in another color as here)........sheesh you certainly like to "reach" way out there don't you? :cocktail: 

Besides all of the above IF it comes down to "assumptions" YOU have no creditials to take the place of HIS........thus most will believe him.......he's qualified to make assumptions on the DATA......that HE has, YOU are not and don't even have it IF you were.......a summary is not the whole thing you see........duh


----------



## thesource

Geesh. It really troubles me tht folks are not smart enough to figure things out on their own and that every little detail must be pointed out for them as if they were grade schoolers.

First of all, this "data" from GA was actually a letter from the SR wildlife Biologist to the head of marketing at TenPoint crossbows (or such some title ...irrelevant). It makes you wonder why they are so cozy....hmmmm?

Need Proof - All of the bolded black is the 10pt guy's editorial comments. This is a letter, not data.

Anyway, he was responding to questions from the tenpoint guy about GA data. Its obvious to anyone who has something beyond a 3rd grade education that the first 1/2 of this response is the data that the tenpoint guy asked for and that the second half is the biologists interpretation of the data. The terms "estimate" and "assumption" that I have so much fun picking on are the biologists honest attempts to try and answer the tenpoint guy's question (even though its obvious he cannot CALCULATE the answer, which is what us science types do when we actually have data.)

Anyway, look at it in this light and you all will see the truth. By the way - don't believe me? Look up the original thread in the crossbow thread. Aceoky's brilliant breakthrough data is really yesterday's news. It was probably from 1-2 months ago, for those interested in looking it up.


_
*
The following is data from the state of Georgia on the first two season where crossbows were legal. It appears from this data that the crossbow has made a positive impact on the number of hunters and the desired goal of reducing the deer herd population.*
Deer Harvest Summary for 2002-2003

Archery Harvest (including crossbow)*

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

Archery Deer Hunters - 97,392

Archery Buck Harvest - 6,300

Archery Doe Harvest - 31,500

Total Archery Harvest - 37,800

Average Deer/Hunter - 0.4

* Number of hunters using a crossbow - 17,322 
Crossbow harvest - 4,429 (12% of archery harvest; 1% of total harvest)

Deer Harvest Summary for 2003-2004

Archery Harvest (including crossbow)*

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

Archery Deer Hunters - 111,682 (+14,290 from 2002-2003 )

Archery Buck Harvest - 15,300 (+9,000 from 2002-2003)

Archery Doe Harvest - 42,300 (+10,800 from 2002-2003)

Total Archery Harvest - 57,600 (+19,800 from 2002-2003)

Average Deer/Hunter - 0.5 (+.1 from 2002-2003 )

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

Crossbow harvest - 10,313 (22% of archery harvest; 3% of total harvest)

(+5,884 from 2002-2003)
*
Summary from Nick Nicholson/Georgia Senior Wildlife Biologist *
*It looks like Georgia has found a winner in crossbows...I received this information from the Senior Wildlife Biologist in Georgia*..."I have just completed looking at Georgia's 2003-2004 hunter survey results. Because of the interest in crossbow hunting, we decided to take a closer look at crossbow harvest. I have included excerpts from the annual report below.

The 2003-2004 hunting season marked the second year that crossbows were legal for the majority of hunters in Georgia. Previously, only those hunters with certified disabilities were permitted to use crossbows.

The number of crossbow hunters and their harvest during 2003-2004 increased by 55.3% and 168.0% respectively over 2002-2003. 

To put these numbers more in perspective, crossbow hunters comprised 24.8% of archery hunters and 9.1% of all hunters for 2003-2004. Crossbow harvest comprised 21.8% of archery harvest but only 2.6% of the 2003-2004 total Georgia deer harvest.

Thirteen point five percent (13.5%) of crossbow hunters indicated they previously had used a crossbow under the handicap permit system. 

Thirty one point one percent (31.1%) of crossbow hunters (6,884) indicated they had not hunted with archery equipment prior to using a crossbow. 

To estimate the real impact crossbow hunters have on total harvest we must make several assumptions. The first is that new crossbow hunters who already participated in archery hunting did not increase their harvest by changing from compound/recurve to crossbow. 

The success rate for crossbows (.49 deer/hunter) is comparable to that of compound bows (.51 deer/hunter). 


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

There was a significant increase in the number of archery hunters for 2003-2004. 


The raw estimates give us about 9,300 additional archers. 


A large part of this increase can be attributed to the 31.1% of crossbow hunters (6,884) who indicated they were new to archery hunting.


Additionally, age structure data indicates an influx of older hunters into the crossbow hunter ranks. 

A portion of these individuals are likely retired archery hunters who were attracted back into archery hunting by the legalization of crossbows.


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

These data and assumptions suggest that any additional harvest attributed to the legalization of crossbows is not significant at a statewide level.

During 2002-2003 there was a small tendency for crossbow hunters to be older than the general hunter population. 

That trend continues for 2003-2004, particularly in age classes over fifty years old. Thirty four point six percent (34.6%) of the general hunter population is over 50 years old while forty three percent (43.0%) of crossbow hunters are over 50 years old. 


Older age groups show greater crossbow use for both seasons crossbows have been legal, however there also was an increase in crossbow selectivity this year by the 25-29 year age group. The average age for the general hunting population is 43.8 years. 

The average age for crossbow hunters is 45.3 years. 

This is a summary of our results. 

A complete copy of the final report will be available soon. Hope this helps. Let me know if you need any additional information." 

Nick Nicholson/Georgia Senior Wildlife Biologist_


----------



## aceoky

At no time did I claim either "new" nor "breakthrough", I did and still maintain that it IS DATA......and also maintain that YOU are not qualified to say what it means or doesn't mean, AND certainly NOT more so than the author........:darkbeer: 

Now having proven that it IS DATA, and factual based upon the source(the Senior Wildlife Biologist from GA......NOT the source here on the forums btw) 

Did you by any stretch have a real point to make?? That's what I thought:darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

OK source........again, no links or anything but that's fine.....


http://www.realtree.com/community/news-detail.tpl?ID=709

Georgia Crossbow Study

Georgia Xbow Study Dispels Many Myths

By Bob McNitt

Following its decision to legalize hunting with crossbows, starting with the 2002 archery season, *the State of Georgia's DNR has kept accurate records to reflect the impact the decision would have, on both the deer and the hunting community. *

Following the two-year study, the* data *collected *dispelled several myths* regarding the horizontal bow's impact on the resource and the hunting force.

In a report prepared by Nick Nicholson, Senior Wildlife Biologist for the DNR, the number of archery deer hunters and archery deer harvest increased significantly by 11.6-percent and 44.3-percent, respectively, during the 2003-04 season. Statewide, 36.7-percent of all deer hunters hunted with archery equipment during the 2003-04 season.

*In 2003-04 there were about 9,300 additional archers, the majority of that increase being attributed to crossbow legalization.*

However, the data indicated that any additional deer harvest attributed to the legalization of crossbows was not significant at a statewide level. Nicholson notes, "If we assume all additional archers hunted with crossbows and the 0.49 deer per hunter harvest rate for crossbows is additive, then about 4,550 additional deer would be attributed to these new archery (crossbow) hunters."

*The success rate for crossbows (0.49 deer/hunter) proved to be comparable to that of compound bows (0.51 deer/hunter). *


The survey indicates that 78.5-percent of archers use compounds. "It is less likely that a traditional archer would switch to a crossbow," Nicholson wrote. "Even if they did, the traditional archer success rate (0.46 deer/hunter) is only slightly lower than that of crossbow hunters. The data showed that older archers are more likely to report hunting with a crossbow. Archers over 50 years old were significantly more likely to report using a crossbow than archers under 50 years old."

*Nicholson also notes that "The debate among hunters about legalization of crossbows is reminiscent of a similar debate on the 1977-78 legalization of compound bows. The technological leap from recurve bows to compound bows was much greater than the current move to crossbows. *


(Crossbows actually are more "primitive" than compound bows, having been around since the fourth century BC.) 


*Crossbows provide the opportunity for older archers to participate in archery deer hunting longer. *

They also introduce additional hunters into the sport of archery. It is likely that many of them will seek increased archery hunting challenges and change to compound or recurve bows. 

*Recruiting new archers and retaining older ones is a positive event for all hunters."*


----------



## aceoky

^


NOTE: From the link down, the only changes made were bolding relevent parts and some spacing for ease to read......:cocktail:


----------



## Free Range

> First of all, this "data" from GA was actually a letter from the SR wildlife Biologist to the head of marketing at TenPoint crossbows (or such some title ...irrelevant). It makes you wonder why they are so cozy....hmmmm?


Is that a fact? How come Thesource is the first one to point this out, thank you Source, I didn’t know that little bit of information before.


----------



## aceoky

FR you just may want to read this and then decide about thanking the source..... 





aceoky said:


> OK source........again, no links or anything but that's fine.....
> 
> 
> http://www.realtree.com/community/news-detail.tpl?ID=709
> 
> Georgia Crossbow Study
> 
> Georgia Xbow Study Dispels Many Myths
> 
> By Bob McNitt
> 
> Following its decision to legalize hunting with crossbows, starting with the 2002 archery season, *the State of Georgia's DNR has kept accurate records to reflect the impact the decision would have, on both the deer and the hunting community. *
> 
> Following the two-year study, the* data *collected *dispelled several myths* regarding the horizontal bow's impact on the resource and the hunting force.
> 
> In a report prepared by Nick Nicholson, Senior Wildlife Biologist for the DNR, the number of archery deer hunters and archery deer harvest increased significantly by 11.6-percent and 44.3-percent, respectively, during the 2003-04 season. Statewide, 36.7-percent of all deer hunters hunted with archery equipment during the 2003-04 season.
> 
> *In 2003-04 there were about 9,300 additional archers, the majority of that increase being attributed to crossbow legalization.*
> 
> However, the data indicated that any additional deer harvest attributed to the legalization of crossbows was not significant at a statewide level. Nicholson notes, "If we assume all additional archers hunted with crossbows and the 0.49 deer per hunter harvest rate for crossbows is additive, then about 4,550 additional deer would be attributed to these new archery (crossbow) hunters."
> 
> *The success rate for crossbows (0.49 deer/hunter) proved to be comparable to that of compound bows (0.51 deer/hunter). *
> 
> 
> The survey indicates that 78.5-percent of archers use compounds. "It is less likely that a traditional archer would switch to a crossbow," Nicholson wrote. "Even if they did, the traditional archer success rate (0.46 deer/hunter) is only slightly lower than that of crossbow hunters. The data showed that older archers are more likely to report hunting with a crossbow. Archers over 50 years old were significantly more likely to report using a crossbow than archers under 50 years old."
> 
> *Nicholson also notes that "The debate among hunters about legalization of crossbows is reminiscent of a similar debate on the 1977-78 legalization of compound bows. The technological leap from recurve bows to compound bows was much greater than the current move to crossbows. *
> 
> 
> (Crossbows actually are more "primitive" than compound bows, having been around since the fourth century BC.)
> 
> 
> *Crossbows provide the opportunity for older archers to participate in archery deer hunting longer. *
> 
> They also introduce additional hunters into the sport of archery. It is likely that many of them will seek increased archery hunting challenges and change to compound or recurve bows.
> 
> *Recruiting new archers and retaining older ones is a positive event for all hunters."*


----------



## Free Range

read what? All you have to do is say yes or no, is this a report to TenPoint or not? I would think even someone like you could answer such a simple question.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> read what?
> 
> Umm what I posted, (with a link) duh
> 
> 
> All you have to do is say yes or no, is this a report to TenPoint or not?
> 
> NO, not that I'm aware of , but *I* do not work for them.... how's that? What I posted as I recall is from a "press release"(I believe) I have NO knowledge of any alleged letter to ten point,
> 
> 
> I would think *even someone like you *could answer such a simple question.


There you are....... 

Has nothing whatever to do with anything.....anyway....you guys will "reach" to any lengths to "prove"- "nothing".....AND .............NO need to get :"personal".......sheesh!


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> FR you just may want to read this and then decide about thanking the source.....



LOL - ANYONE can see that the realtree article is written from the information in the letter to tenpoint! You are double dipping from a bad source, how funny is that!!!! 

Question - Do you really believe that even the most stupid person in the world does not understand that this is a purely theoretical statement?

_
"*If we assume* all additional archers hunted with crossbows *and *the 0.49 deer per hunter harvest rate for crossbows is additive, *then *about 4,550 additional deer would be attributed to these new archery (crossbow) hunters."_

That is so clearly written as a hypothesis that only an idiot would argue otherwise.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> LOL - ANYONE can see that the realtree article is written from the information in the letter to tenpoint! You are double dipping from a bad source, how funny is that!!!!
> 
> With all due respect you have failed to prove that letter even exists, and based on some postes you've "edited" and changed, I won't take your word it exists........nice try though......that information has been on the net since right after the season ended and that summary was prepared........so any "letters" could be easily manufactured, but not "accurate" or "fact"
> 
> Question - Do you really believe that even the most stupid person in the world does not understand that this is a purely theoretical statement?
> 
> 
> _
> "*If we assume* all additional archers hunted with crossbows *and *the 0.49 deer per hunter harvest rate for crossbows is additive, *then *about 4,550 additional deer would be attributed to these new archery (crossbow) hunters."_
> 
> I'll go ahead and give you that one, but keep in mind HE IS the expert and you are not, so I think it's very safe to assume what he says has much merit, given his position....:wink:
> 
> That is so clearly written as a hypothesis that only an idiot would argue otherwise.


NO need to argue, on that point.......fact is though it's HIS job to examine and comment on the data, I seriously doubt any problems can be found as he's been in that posisition, long enough to be the SENIOR wildlife biologist, that FACT speaks volumes for his credibility, his reliability, and his conclusions! :tongue:


----------



## thesource

Sigh.

You still aren't getting it. He is answering questions posed to him from a crossbow manufacturer.

The manufacturer's rep probably asked him something to the extent of "what is the maximum impact that crossbows would have on the GA deer population?" and he answered:
_
"If we assume all additional archers hunted with crossbows and the 0.49 deer per hunter harvest rate for crossbows is additive, then about 4,550 additional deer would be attributed to these new archery (crossbow) hunters."_

Are you getting it yet? It's ALL theoretical. How can I prove it? Simple . We KNOW that not all "additional archers" used crossbows.

As for me proving the letter exisits, I told you where to find it. If you are too lazy (typical crossbow attribute) to go and find it - tough.


----------



## aceoky

Doesn't matter EVEN IF he is.........unless you can prove he "altered the data", his name is on the line(think he'd risk that AND his job for 10pt or Horton...or any of them I don't) thus "your point" has no "meat" to it.....no merit....nothing relevent in other words......

FACT is, he's qualified to answer the questions, doesn't matter if he's answering a GM dealer in Detroit, or a Doctor in Denver....... or a bow shop in Boulder.....(this is kinda fun btw) :cocktail: He IS the expert, and he says it is what it is......that's good enough for most........if not for you "tough".......:tongue:


----------



## thesource

You really are not very bright, are you?

Of course he's qualified to answer the question. He made a "worst case" assessment of how many deer would be killed by crossbows in GA...any of us could do that from the real data that was included in your post if we made the same assumptions that he did (that all new archers were crossbowers and that crossbow harvest = bow harvest). That's easy.


The problem is that you are now calling his worse case estimation "data" and implying that it is somehow meaningful. It is not. It is what it is - the answer to a question, posed by a crossbow manufacturing rep.

This is the classic example to support Free Range's contention that your "facts" are not.


----------



## aceoky

NO.......that is not very accurate.......MOST know when an expert in their field compiles data and speaks about that DATA it is FACT..........that IS what was said.........sheesh

Funny thing about FR and "data" he doesn't have any......come to think of it neither do you........ALL either of you can do is HOPE to draw confusion and questions on what IS data after someone goes to the trouble of "digging it up, and posting it", much easier than finding your own....

However you *opinion*on the data or even if it's data, does NOT change the FACT.........

NO way will you convince me, and I doubt anyone else that HE would "change" facts to 'answer a crossbow dealer's questions"

HE would in fact use the data(which YOU nor I have even seen...........we've ONLY seen a summary, yet YOU continue to question FACTS you've clearly NOT even seen!!!)........ Amazing!

He in fact said he USED DATA, and it was a summary........spin all you can.........you'll never change that FACT


NOW for the "fun part"

Nicholson also notes that "*The debate among hunters about legalization of crossbows is reminiscent of a similar debate on the 1977-78 legalization of compound bows

. The technological leap from recurve bows to compound bows was much greater than the current move to crossbows. *


Imagine that, just AS we've been saying!! 

So much for FR and his opinions on my data!!! 

I do so enjoy the both of you *trying * to convince your opinions carry more wieght than an expert's opinion, and facts and data though! I trust most can see through it and probably enjoy it as much as I do!:cocktail: 

Pay attention here since you want to "protect bowhunting"


*Crossbows provide the opportunity for older archers to participate in archery deer hunting longer. 

They also introduce additional hunters into the sport of archery. It is likely that many of them will seek increased archery hunting challenges and change to compound or recurve bows. 

Recruiting new archers and retaining older ones is a positive event for all hunters."*


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> NOW for the "fun part"
> 
> Nicholson also notes that "*The debate among hunters about legalization of crossbows is reminiscent of a similar debate on the 1977-78 legalization of compound bows
> 
> . The technological leap from recurve bows to compound bows was much greater than the current move to crossbows. *



LOL.

I can accept that a sr wildlife biologist opinion is significant on matters of wildlife. But his expertise does not exrend to hunting weapons or methods.

But now you want us to believe his opinion of bowhunting matters - it does not.

If we accept your biologist as an expert in matters of biology, you must accept our expert in matters of bowhunting. The expert in bowhunting is P&Y, the experts at the state level are the State Bowhunting Associations...all of which would disagree with your biology expert.


----------



## aceoky

I'd have to say that what P&Y says is even more debatable than what a wildlife biologist says, as for the weapons, WHO do you think decides in most states what weapons are allowed exactly when??? 

IF you *choose* to believe P&Y is "the experts", that's fine by me(and some will even agree with you), most don't see them that way......and they are NOT experts on crossbows their errors in statements about them and their use has MORE than proven that to be a FACT !:cocktail: 

In fact many bowhunters think they're "losing touch" with their own membership and what they are in favor of (may have something to do with the * thing???) 

At any rate *I* refute any and all of their opinions as non-relevent and biased..........as do too many to ignore.....

Those who choose to accept them won't get any "hassle" from me, I however do not accept them.......at all.:darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> At any rate *I* refute any and all of their opinions as non-relevent and biased


That's OK.

I refute any and all of YOUR opinions as non-relevent and biased.

As do many others.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> That's OK.
> 
> I refute any and all of YOUR opinions as non-relevent and biased.
> 
> As do many others.


Well you're certainly entitled to your opinion.........no matter how incorrect it is!:tongue:


----------



## aceoky

Well, I know many of you are going to miss me  
but I"m expecting family from Indiana in, we're hoping to do some fishing, maybe some shooting, just have some fun, so .........................


----------



## Free Range

Another fact, in 2001 for the first time people in WI over the age of 65 could use the x-bow in archery season with no restrictions. From the year 2000 to the year 2002, Archery hunter numbers dropped, from 171978 to 138011, a difference of 33,967.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Another fact, *in 2001 *for the first time people in WI over the age of 65 could use the x-bow in archery season with no restrictions. *From the year 2000 to the year 2002,* Archery hunter numbers dropped, from 171978 to 138011, a difference of 33,967.


So using your fact..........the decline started BEFORE the change was made!:cocktail: :darkbeer: :darkbeer: 

Impossible to make a connection to the crossbow then.....


----------



## Free Range

> So using your fact..........the decline started BEFORE the change was made!


There is no way to make that statement from the posted data. Year 2000 numbers equal x, year 2003 numbers equal <x for a total of 33967 less archers after the x-bow law change. 




> Impossible to make a connection to the crossbow then.....


Not fair to give your opinion, you only want facts, remember, not what you “think” they mean. I offer no opinion as to what these facts mean, only give them so people other then you and me can decide for themselves what they mean.


----------



## Free Range

Here’s another fact, in VA from the year 2003 to 2004, hunters over the age of 65 dropped by 428.


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> Another fact, in 2001 for the first time people in WI over the age of 65 could use the x-bow in archery season with no restrictions. From the year 2000 to the year 2002, Archery hunter numbers dropped, from 171978 to 138011, a difference of 33,967.



CWD scare...


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> Here’s another fact, in VA from the year 2003 to 2004, hunters over the age of 65 dropped by 428.


The older you get the more likely you'll die..


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> read what? All you have to do is say yes or no, is this a report to TenPoint or not? I would think even someone like you could answer such a simple question.


Nick sent me the same report at my request BEFORE the TenPoint people ever posted it..

He would have done the same for you too.

No deep, dark secret conspiracy going on..


----------



## willie

thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> I can accept that a sr wildlife biologist opinion is significant on matters of wildlife. But his expertise does not exrend to hunting weapons or methods.
> 
> But now you want us to believe his opinion of bowhunting matters - it does not.
> 
> If we accept your biologist as an expert in matters of biology, you must accept our expert in matters of bowhunting. The expert in bowhunting is P&Y, the experts at the state level are the State Bowhunting Associations...all of which would disagree with your biology expert.


Our expert biologist is looking at this in terms of the health of the herd, how he can better control the herd, provide additional hunting opportunities and increase revenues - all at the same time.

In the meantine your "experts" can only whine about others in "their season". They present NO data as to how the crossbow would negatively affect them or the game that we pursue.

Their stand is purely emotional and social.


----------



## thesource

willie said:


> Our expert biologist is looking at this in terms of the health of the herd, how he can better control the herd, provide additional hunting opportunities and increase revenues - all at the same time.
> 
> In the meantine your "experts" can only whine about others in "their season". They present NO data as to how the crossbow would negatively affect them or the game that we pursue.
> 
> Their stand is purely emotional and social.


Certainly bowhunting is much more than herd health and controlling the herd, as there are far more effective ways of doing that. Increasing revenues has absolutely nothing to do with the deer herd or the deer hunters.

Their is most certainly emotional and social reasons for bowhunting that shouldn't and can't be ignored.


By the way, you are opening the barn door with the "provide additional opportunity" line of reasoning. 2 years ago, NY's expert biologist proposed a 3 day MZ season in the middle of bowseason eek: ) that met with a significant amount of emotional and social from the bowhunters of NY.

This plays to your "biology experts" as infallible angle, too. The reason they wanted the 3 day hunt was to reduce NY's out of control deer herd. 2 years later (and without the MZ addition), over 2/3 of NY WMU are below the target population.

How could the "expert biologists" make such a mistake? One, they do not know as much as they think they do. Harvest "estimates", herd size "estimates", reporting "estimates", all end up with significant errors. Two, they cannot see the future - back to back harsh winters resulted in higher than normal winterkill while 3) their outrageously liberal doe permits were allowing regional areas of deer to legally take an absolute pounding.

Wildlife management is not an exact science. Biologists are talented and hardworking, they deserve our respect and support, and their advice with regard to herd strength and size should always be considered.

But they are not infallible, and they have no business determining what should be defined as a bow or not. If anything, that would be a physicists job, or engineers.

Let's give biologists our respect, but let's not go overboard with it - they need to do their job and stay out of the politics.


----------



## Jim C

source says:If anything, that would be a physicists job, or engineers.


No source, it should be defined by archery groups that have no agenda. The NAA, the NFAA and the IBO all consider crossbows archery bows.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> There is no way to make that statement from the posted data. Year 2000 numbers equal x, year 2003 numbers equal <x for a total of 33967 less archers after the x-bow law change.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not fair to give your opinion, you only want facts, remember, not what you “think” they mean. I offer no opinion as to what these facts mean, only give them so people other then you and me can decide for themselves what they mean.


I'm NOT doing that, it's OBVIOUS that according to your posted fact, they started dropping the year prior......simple fact NOT opinion......you posted it after all......

NOW perhaps it's an "opinion" that since they dropped prior to the crossbow inclusion,(phychic bowhunters????) the crossbow couldn't have caused the decline, but then I forgot how "magical" the crossbow is in you and your group's eyes.......


----------



## aceoky

willie said:


> CWD scare...



Exactly! I "thought" that would go without saying but obviously not.....


----------



## aceoky

willie said:


> The older you get the more likely you'll die..


Those who don't look both ways before crossing a busy street are at least 10 times more likely to get hit by a motor vehicle than those who do look both ways first.......:wink:


----------



## Free Range

How the heck can you say that, year 2000 x number of hunters, that is the base line, you can’t have the year of 2001 as a base line, the x-bow was included that year. Math isn’t your best subject is it?


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> source says:If anything, that would be a physicists job, or engineers.
> 
> 
> No source, it should be defined by archery groups that have no agenda. The NAA, the NFAA and the IBO all consider crossbows archery bows.


OK - let's do what the spotters do - separate classes. Of course, that means separate seasons in bowhunting (I know you need translation from time to time, being the archery only guru who pretends he is a bowhunter.)LOL.


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> How the heck can you say that, year 2000 x number of hunters, that is the base line, you can’t have the year of 2001 as a base line, the x-bow was included that year. Math isn’t your best subject is it?


CWD scare.

The numbers are going back up now aren't they?


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> How the heck can you say that, year 2000 x number of hunters, that is the base line, you can’t have the year of 2001 as a base line, the x-bow was included that year. Math isn’t your best subject is it?


Here IS how.....

Originally Posted by Free Range
Another fact, in 2001 for the first time people in WI over the age of 65 could use the x-bow in archery season with no restrictions. 

*From the year 2000 to the year 2002, Archery hunter numbers dropped,* from 171978 to 138011, a difference of 33,967.

See? And it's more of a reading comprehension thing than a math thing....fwiw.....

Now according to what YOU posted..........they in fact stated to decline the year before the crossbow was included......it doesn't say how much, just that "From the year 2000"..........thus, it's obvious that they were already in decline.......sometime in 2000.......otherwise it would say there were "X" at the END of 2000 and only "y" at the END of 2001 etc.etc. .......it does NOT say that does it?

Everyone knows that was a direct result of the CWD scare, and had nothing to do with crossbows at all.....pro or con......most also know that trend has changed, but I notice that data wasn't posted, and I know why also.....

Question, if say we "lose" 400 bowhunters, and then gain 14,000 +- with the inclusion of the crossbow would you agree to a "net gain"??


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Question, if say we "lose" 400 bowhunters, and then gain 14,000 +- with the inclusion of the crossbow would you agree to a "net gain"??


NO - they are not BOWHUNTERS.


----------



## Free Range

> Question, if say we "lose" 400 bowhunters, and then gain 14,000 +- with the inclusion of the crossbow would you agree to a "net gain"??


 NO, but IF that happen I would agree there was a gain of hunters. 



> Now according to what YOU posted..........they in fact stated to decline the year before the crossbow was included......it doesn't say how much, just that "From the year 2000"..........thus, it's obvious that they were already in decline.......sometime in 2000.......otherwise it would say there were "X" at the END of 2000 and only "y" at the END of 2001 etc.etc. .......it does NOT say that does it?


END of 2000, they really don’t count hunters before the season, now do they? X number of hunters in 2000, x number in 2001, now where do you think they get the x from, before the season, or after? Now if the numbers are gathered after the season in year 2000, and are gathered after the season in 2001 and there is a drop, when do you think it happened, in 2000 or 2001. I will let you ponder that awhile, and see if it sinks in. 

And again please don’t add your opinion, it may be to CWD, or it may not, your opinion counts for nothing here.


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> ............. it may be to CWD, or it may not, your opinion counts for nothing here.



And if it is not what do you propose it is? 

Do you actually think adding a new weapon for some would end up with less hunters?

Totaly absurd..


----------



## willie

thesource said:


> NO - they are not BOWHUNTERS.



International _*BOWHUNTERS*_ Organization Rules...

http://www.ibo.net/rules/

11. CROSSBOW (XBOW)

Crossbows must be standard production crossbows with a maximum draw weight of 190 lbs, and a maximum bolt speed of 300 feet per second. Bolts must be no less than 20/64ths in diameter and no shorter than 14 inches. All bolts must be identical in type, size, fletch, point weight and overall weight. Bolts must use at least three vanes or feathers and screw in field points. Any type sight may be used, however, sights with magnification are limited to no more than 8x magnification. XBOW *archers* will shoot from the green stake.

Crossbows must be in sound condition with a working safety. Crossbows shall not be cocked until the *archer* is at the stake and preparing to shoot. The safety must remain on until the *archer* is ready to shoot. Crossbows must be loaded while in a downward position and pointed toward the target. No crossbow may be loaded while pointed up.


.


----------



## thesource

LOL....

IBO is a target shooting org.

We're talking about HUNTING....duh


----------



## willie

thesource said:


> LOL....
> 
> IBO is a target shooting org.
> 
> We're talking about HUNTING....duh


Actually the word in their title says *BOWHUNTER*.. duh

Tell us about your bowhunting...


----------



## thesource

LOL -

Yea, but their claim is as tenuous as yours.

Check the website, Willie.

Target shooters. On the periphery of bowhunting at best.

Want me to scare up a list of real bowhunting organizations.? That would be NABC. Need a link?

I see that Indiana Bowhunters Association is on the list. I suggest you start with your own state's representatives if you need a clue what bowhunting means.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> OK - let's do what the spotters do - separate classes. Of course, that means separate seasons in bowhunting (I know you need translation from time to time, being the archery only guru who pretends he is a bowhunter.)LOL.



You have yet to give a logical reason for separating different bows into different seasons.

You pretend to be a bowhunter and you obviously have no clue about archery.


----------



## Free Range

> And if it is not what do you propose it is?
> 
> Do you actually think adding a new weapon for some would end up with less hunters?
> 
> Totaly absurd..


If we live by Ace’s rules, then I cannot propose what I think is the cause. What is totally absurd, is a debate where only facts are allowed and no comment, see opinion, on that the facts mean are allowed. You see Willie, for the last week Ace has been crying about me giving an opinion as to what the numbers he post mean. He has been saying my opinion is worthless, and for me to post facts about the x-bow, well I have and now he wants to give his opinion as to what those facts mean, now that is hypocritical and absurd. 

And by the way Ace, please explain why you think a man that reaches a point in life where he can no longer hunt in archery season even if allowed to use a x-bow, is no longer worth consideration.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> If we live by Ace’s rules, then I cannot propose what I think is the cause. What is totally absurd, is a debate where only facts are allowed and no comment, see opinion, on that the facts mean are allowed. You see Willie, for the last week Ace has been crying about me giving an opinion as to what the numbers he post mean. He has been saying my opinion is worthless, and for me to post facts about the x-bow, well I have and now he wants to give his opinion as to what those facts mean, now that is hypocritical and absurd.
> 
> NO what IS absurd is your thinking that your opinion about data "overides" that data, case in point the GA SENIOR wildlife Biologist........
> 
> *And by the way Ace, please explain why you think a man that reaches a point in life where he can no longer hunt in archery season even if allowed to use a x-bow, is no longer worth consideration*.



You first cried and whined and complained that I refuse to answer that question now AGAIN, you say I did answer it..........now which is it? 

IF I did say that..........post it up, show us all.....

....we all know I refused to answer that stupid question, since you asked it and kept asking it........that hasn't and won't change..........I would have thought by now you'd figured that fact out, guess not......

Now you state these are fact, yet all I see is some "numbers" and stuff you've posted no way to possilby confirm them, much less know if the source is even credible........hmmm guess though to you they're 100% facts........


----------



## aceoky

*IN Contrast though......*

In contrast 

http://www.caids-wi.org/Data3.html

Take a moment to look at the graphic.

*Does it appear as if anything unusual was undertaken in 2002 and 2003? *
Would you at all suspect a multi-million dollar program was employed to dramatically boost the harvest in 2002 and 2003?

Take a moment to crunch and analyze some harvest data numbers. Note the 2002 Deer Kill was 4951 - a nice increase over the 2001 results. However, 2001 was also the worst harvest in the last 15 years - thus the low water mark. If you set the 2002 results against the average harvest since 1989, the 2002 results - under the ambitious *CWD Management Program *- were almost 200 below the average deer kill (5142) from the previous 13 years under normal hunting regulations. 

Now look at the data from the second year under the CWD Managed Hunt - the 2003 season. The total harvest of 4134 was the second worst Deer Kill in the last 15 years. In 2003 20% fewer deer were killed than the average yearly deer kill from 1989 - 2001 (under normal hunting regulations).

What conclusions can be drawn from this data? At best these facts indicate the special CWD Managed Hunts are ineffective; at worst they argue that the treatment has been curiously counterproductive. Adding fuel to the latter conclusion is the anecdotal evidence of individual hunters bagging 50 - 100 deer. Thus a small cadre of shooters could be accounting for a disproportionately high percentage of the kill statistics. This element plus the overall below average results suggest significantly fewer deer hunters are participating in the CWD Managed Hunts. 

Impact on the Hunting Culture. 

*Fewer deer hunters *raises a new set of problems. It is broadly accepted that CWD management cannot be accomplished without the active support of the hunting community.

*Yet if the current CWD Management strategy is alienating more hunters than it is attracting, continuing the strategy will materially harm the long term management of both CWD and deer overpopulation.*

Like I said(and Willie..........Willie you're faster than I am, lol) it WAS the CWD..........there are some facts to support that, if you'd like more.......:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> There is no way to make that statement from the posted data. Year 2000 numbers equal x, year 2003 numbers equal <x for a total of 33967 less archers after the x-bow law change.
> You'll find the reason posted below(with link which proves that again, I'm correct):tongue:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not fair to give your opinion, you only want facts, remember, not what you “think” they mean. I offer no opinion as to what these facts mean, only give them so people other then you and me can decide for themselves what they mean.



Here are the facts which support "my opinion", as you stated it.......(this is twice now on this one issue btw)

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:JM009vWmnYUJ:www.uwex.edu/ces/ag/issues/fmd/Econ%2520Effects-stpap450.pdf+CWD++in++in+WI&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=13

The Economic Effects in *2002* of Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) In Wisconsin
(Please note the DATE)

Wisconsin’s 600,000 deer hunters will bear the brunt of the economic losses fromchronic wasting disease (CWD) in the Wisconsin deer herd. 

*This disease and the way it has been communicated to the people of the state have compromised an activity that hunters value highly. *

Methods are available to express these losses in dollars. The problem has yet to be studied enough to yield precise estimates. Nevertheless, I used values of deer hunting from Wisconsin and elsewhere and plausible assumptions explained below to make rough estimates. Wisconsin deer hunters could easily lose between $70 million and $100 million in recreation benefits this fall. 

More bad news about CWD would make the losses even larger. Rather than calling attention to the economic losses that will be borne by deer hunters, press accounts have focused on *lost deer hunters *spending and resulting impacts on Wisconsin’s economy

Now, if we assume that *concerns about CWD lead to reduced hunting participation of 10% to 20% in the fall of 2002, *applying these percentages to total spending implies that spending on deer hunting would go down by between $48 million to $96 million

See there? Again it was CWD and concerns, and that is not my opinion! :cocktail:


----------



## willie

thesource said:


> LOL -
> 
> Yea, but their claim is as tenuous as yours.
> 
> Check the website, Willie.
> 
> Target shooters. On the periphery of bowhunting at best.
> 
> Want me to scare up a list of real bowhunting organizations.? That would be NABC. Need a link?
> 
> I see that Indiana Bowhunters Association is on the list. I suggest you start with your own state's representatives if you need a clue what bowhunting means.


The IBA (and other clubs on your list), like the P & Y club, do not represent anyone other than their members and only a fraction of them.


----------



## willie

Jim C said:


> You have yet to give a logical reason for separating different bows into different seasons.
> 
> You pretend to be a bowhunter and you obviously have no clue about archery.


----------



## Free Range

> *Now, if we assume that concerns about CWD *lead to reduced hunting participation of 10% to 20% in the fall of 2002, applying these percentages to total spending implies that spending on deer hunting would go down by between $48 million to $96 million
> 
> See there? Again it was CWD and concerns, and that is not my opinion!


First Ace, your opinion does not matter, nor does the opinion of whoever you quoted above. All we care about is facts. Now if you want to post facts about CWD, fine, but any claims to cause and affect are merely opinion and assumption. And anyhow, I didn’t say the x-bow had anything to do with it, now did I?


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> First Ace, your opinion does not matter, nor does the opinion of whoever you quoted above. All we care about is facts. Now if you want to post facts about CWD, fine, but any claims to cause and affect are merely opinion and assumption. And anyhow, I didn’t say the x-bow had anything to do with it, now did I?


In case you're still having a reading comprehension issue, I'll be more than happy to post what those assumption are based upon and his credentials.........( I posted the link, so I'd bet you already know this fact, but hope most won't realize it)............ 

I have posted two sources of facts of when the CWD started to take a serious toll in WI,(and guess what at the same time the hunter numbers dropped........hmm) it doesn't fit your agenda, so you attempt to dispute it, fine, but attempt is all you have......

You don't have to mention the crossbow that IS what this thread is about, and you made the statement that it could NOT be proven the crossbow wasn't the cause, with the posted data...............relevent part of the quote "with the posted data", thus, I have posted the facts and proof, showing the truth........

As for YOUR facts, with NO links, no way to verify the sources, I'd not "cast stones while in your glass house", but again, that's one of many differences in you and I.......

Don't "preach" about facts when all you have so far posted is (agian) some numbers that we have no way to confirm if they're even accurate.........that's not facts or data, I did let it "slide", but since you insist..........you have failed to prove that they are in fact........facts or data........


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> First Ace, your opinion does not matter, nor does the opinion of whoever you quoted above. All we care about is facts. Now if you want to post facts about CWD, fine, but any claims to cause and affect are merely opinion and assumption. And anyhow, I didn’t say the x-bow had anything to do with it, now did I?


So what was/is your "opinion" on why the numbers went down?

You all were discussing this in the context of "crossbows" were you not?


----------



## willie

Let's see...pick one...

The reason a bowhunter in Wisconsin didn't hunt a certain year is:

1) There are some 65 and up year old crossbowers out there.

2) There is a disease (CWD) in the deer.

Which one (if any) would most likly keep *YOU* out of the deer woods?



.


----------



## Free Range

> I have posted two sources of facts of when the CWD started to take a serious toll in WI,(and guess what at the same time the hunter numbers dropped........hmm) it doesn't fit your agenda, so you attempt to dispute it, fine, but attempt is all you have......


An out right lie, I did not dispute it at all. 



> and you made the statement that it could NOT be proven the crossbow wasn't the cause, with the posted data


Please post my quote to this affect. 



> As for YOUR facts, with NO links, no way to verify the sources, I'd not "cast stones while in your glass house", but again, that's one of many differences in you and I.......


Are you saying you always post links and ways to verify what you claim to be facts?



> Don't "preach" about facts when all you have so far posted is (agian) some numbers that we have no way to confirm if they're even accurate.........that's not facts or data, I did let it "slide", but since you insist..........you have failed to prove that they are in fact........facts or data........


If you will remember right, you are the one preaching facts. I posted numbers, (facts) from/about WI, it shouldn’t be all that hard for you to confirm or dispute the numbers I posted.


----------



## Free Range

> So what was/is your "opinion" on why the numbers went down?
> 
> You all were discussing this in the context of "crossbows" were you not?


Sorry not allowed in this debate, LOL



> Let's see...pick one...
> 
> The reason a bowhunter in Wisconsin didn't hunt a certain year is:
> 
> 1) There are some 65 and up year old crossbowers out there.
> 
> 2) There is a disease (CWD) in the deer.
> 
> Which one (if any) would most likly keep YOU out of the deer woods?


Again only an opinion, it may be backed up by the facts, but it is only opinion. Just as my opinion, backed by the fact that over 50% of hunters in archery season in Ohio use a x-bow = dilution, it is only an opinion.


----------



## aceoky

Quote:
and you made the statement that it could NOT be proven the crossbow wasn't the cause, with the posted data 


Please post my quote to this affect. 

As you wish........

Quote:
Originally Posted by Free Range
............. it may be to CWD, or it may not, your opinion counts for nothing here. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Free Range
Another fact, in 2001 for the first time people in WI over the age of 65 could use the x-bow in archery season with no restrictions. From the year 2000 to the year 2002, Archery hunter numbers dropped, from 171978 to 138011, a difference of 33,967. 


So using your fact..........the decline started BEFORE the change was made! 

Impossible to make a connection to the crossbow then.....



Quote:
Originally Posted by Free Range
There is no way to make that statement from the posted data. Year 2000 numbers equal x, year 2003 numbers equal <x for a total of 33967 less archers after the x-bow law change. 



Would you like more? 

I'd say that more than proves it and that it WAS about crossbows......

This is actually supposed to be about crossbow regs in KY and how the majority were not listened to, but I'm willing to accept data from other states, so long as we're on the same page, and that would include crossbows .....yes?


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Sorry not allowed in this debate, LOL
> 
> 
> 
> Again only an opinion, it may be backed up by the facts, but it is only opinion. Just as my opinion, backed by the fact that *over 50% of hunters in archery season in Ohio use a x-bow = dilution*, it is only an opinion.


BIG difference in "opinons backed up by facts" , and those that are not........most realize this and see how silly this all sounds......... 

Since you admit they are still hunting and in the archery season, most would view that as a positive, you see "dilution"........you would rather they were not hunting at all, fewer hunters for you to "have to deal with" , and "hunt around", most don't care, one day you'll realize this fact


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> Sorry not allowed in this debate, LOL


If you don't want to give your "opinion" that is your prerogative.

But answer the other question - You all were discussing this in the context of "crossbows" were you not? 

It seems that your post of declining numbers was a wild stab at crossbows being legal to the over 65 bunch being the culprit. After it was shown that it was most likely the CWD scare that caused this and not some old folks using crossbows for the first time ever, you want to play Mr. Cutsie.



> Again only an opinion, it may be backed up by the facts, but it is only opinion. Just as my opinion, backed by the fact that over 50% of hunters in archery season in Ohio use a x-bow = dilution, it is only an opinion.


Actually there are more crossbowers in Ohio than vertical bowhunters. Quite a few switch hit and use whatever they feel like on a certain day or as conditions dictate.

Tell me where there is a dilution in that vertical bowhunters are forbidden by regulations from using a vertical bow and must use a crossbow?

Does not the bowhunters in Ohio have a *CHOICE* of longbow, recurve, compound and crossbow? 

What has changed for a bowhunter that wants to do it the "old fashioned way" and pick up a longbow? 

*NOTHING....*

His season has not changed or been "diluted" in any shape or form. He hunts with what he wants to hunt with, in the manner that he wants, and others hunt with what they want and in the manner that they want.

Individual choice is good..


----------



## Free Range

> If you don't want to give your "opinion" that is your prerogative.
> 
> But answer the other question - You all were discussing this in the context of "crossbows" were you not?
> 
> It seems that your post of declining numbers was a wild stab at crossbows being legal to the over 65 bunch being the culprit. After it was shown that it was most likely the CWD scare that caused this and not some old folks using crossbows for the first time ever, you want to play *Mr. Cutsie*.


Thanks the girls think so too. LOL
Actually if you were able to keep up you would know that Ace, has said in the past that the x-bow recruits more hunters. I have said no it does not, it only moves hunters around from one season to another. He said he had proof of these increased hunters, I said there is no way because hunters numbers are falling across the nation. the only reason I posted those numbers is to show that hunter numbers are falling, despite the x-bow. I never said or implied the falling numbers is because of the x-bow. However I did once, to point out how flawed Ace’s thinking is, say it was the x-bows fault that bowhunting was banned in England, but only as a absurd example of his claiming it was the fault of those not wanting the x-bow included in bow season. 

Now you can make all the assumptions you want, as to why I post what numbers, but the fact is, I’m just trying to play by Ace’s rules of no opinion, and show him for the spinner he is. He demands no opinion then gives his all over the place, he demands proof the numbers mean this or that, then provides opinion as to what they mean. He tries to discredit my opinion as not being a professional one, not knowing my history or what degrees I may or may not hold. He places blind faith in a government official, even when the report could be slanted because of who it was directed to. He provides what he calls facts without providing ways to check them, but demands I provide links and contact information. 
He demands I sift through his pages of so called facts, but when I do, he refuses to answer questions posed about his data. 

He says I discount a human beings worth, but won’t answer to why he does the same thing.


----------



## aceoky

Clearly FR sees only what he wishes to see, dismisses the whole rest of everything, and makes accusations he can't back up......including the senior hunter question, I have not answered ever, but he keeps trying to answer for me...... (then tries to attack an answer that I never even gave)..lmao 

IT IS a FACT on the recruitment and retenetion......I've challenged you for too long to disprove it....... you can't the best you can do is *try* to say they're gun hunters who now archery hunt, due to the crossbow, and I say to that GOOD! 

Those are still NEW archery hunters that we'd not have otherwise.......period.....(IF it's even half true, which I doubt, many choose the crossbow who want to archery hunt, can't use a hunting weight bow for various reasons and do not like and sometimes fear guns.......so I know it's not true)

Now since you've made the statement, that it does not, AFTER being shown the FACTS supporting that it does, and AFTER saying "so what it brings in new hunters, why is that a good thing" (so you must have realized then that the facts supported it.....) you disprove the fact they do in fact recruit and retain ARCHERY HUNTERS....... I will be waiting (hint you can't because it's again an indisputable fact that it does, the data and stats prove it beyond any doubt, as I've shown you many times before....)

The burden of proof is now (once again) upon you.........PROVE that the crossbow inclusion does *not *recruit NEW archery hunters AND allow senior hunters to archery hunt longer(that's only one form of retention btw).........IF you can I've posted the data and facts that prove it, you challenge it now.......back it up with facts, or accept the proven fact that it does, your choice.....


----------



## aceoky

FR do I NEED to dig up an old thread where I ASKED YOU If you were a wildlife biologist??? (with your answer??)

And the rest of the relevent question on your "expertise"??
I'd really rather not, but don't be posting that i have no idea of what degrees you don't have, well, I only have what you posted.........I did though believe it then, should have I???


----------



## Free Range

> Clearly FR sees only what he wishes to see, dismisses the whole rest of everything, and makes accusations he can't back up......including the senior hunter question, I have not answered ever, but he keeps trying to answer for me...... (then tries to attack an answer that I never even gave)..


When you accuse someone of something then do the same thing, you don’t need to answer, it is there clearly as the nose on your face. 



> IT IS a FACT on the recruitment and retenetion......I've challenged you for too long to disprove it....... you can't the best you can do is try to say they're gun hunters who now archery hunt, due to the crossbow, and I say to that GOOD!


Again you have not proved this at all, you have only proved there are more people in archery season, you can not and have not proved who these people are. You have only given a couple examples of isolated cases where it is kids, and or old men, and maybe a women or two. And at that you only proved they might have be hunting in archery season because of the x-bow, not that they would never hunt, or give up hunting altogether. 



> you disprove the fact they do in fact recruit and retain ARCHERY HUNTERS....... I will be waiting (hint you can't because it's again an indisputable fact that it does, the data and stats prove it beyond any doubt, as I've shown you many times before....)


In case you didn’t read it correctly, I do not dispute the fact there are more people in archery season, after the x-bow is introduced. That is a far cry from the bogus claims you have made in the past and the ones you continue to make. 



> The burden of proof is now (once again) upon you.........PROVE that the crossbow inclusion does not recruit NEW archery hunters AND allow senior hunters to archery hunt longer(that's only one form of retention btw).........IF you can I've posted the data and facts that prove it, you challenge it now.......back it up with facts, or accept the proven fact that it does, your choice.....


Of course most that follow this know you have changed your tune from “hunters” to “Archery hunters” I don’t dispute there are more people in the woods during archery season, and never have. 



> FR do I NEED to dig up an old thread where I ASKED YOU If you were a wildlife biologist??? (with your answer??)


I don’t remember you asking me that, but if you did the answer is no. Does that mean I don’t have a degree in wildlife Biology? Or Forestry management? Or that I studied those subjects? Does Jim have a degree in archery? Does a person have to have a classical degree in a subject to know about it? Did Jefferson have a degree in physics, Lincoln in political science, Van Gough (sp) in art?


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> When you accuse someone of something then do the same thing, you don’t need to answer, it is there clearly as the nose on your face.
> 
> 
> 
> Again you have not proved this at all, you have only proved there are more people in archery season,
> 
> you can not and have not proved who these people are. You have only given a couple examples of isolated cases where it is kids, and or old men, and maybe a women or two. And at that you only proved they might have be hunting in archery season because of the x-bow, not that they would never hunt, or give up hunting altogether.
> 
> Then as I said the burden of proof is upon you to prove who they are , YOU seem to care, I obviously do not, I openly welcome them all, whether gun hunters or fromt he mini mall, ............IF you can prove any of the above , then please do so.......it's not relevent to me, the FACT is there ARE more archery hunters ........that IS what I care about from a poliitcal and personal enjoyment stance, not for selfish reasons.......as some maintain that stance....
> 
> BTW , Isolated, a woman or two.....who do you think you're "fooling"(or trying to is more accurate)
> 
> Exactly how many examples should I need to post to prove something, should I continue to use bandwith to show the same things 20 times over??? IF they are they ARE......period......we all know the stats.......and most KNOW more = better, it's sad you can't or won't try to understand that for all of us
> 
> 
> In case you didn’t read it correctly, I do not dispute the fact there are more people in archery season, after the x-bow is introduced. That is a far cry from the bogus claims you have made in the past and the ones you continue to make.
> 
> That's too funny to even comment on.....that IS the whole point and my claims.....
> 
> 
> 
> Of course most that follow this know you have changed your tune from “hunters” to “Archery hunters” I don’t dispute there are more people in the woods during archery season, and never have.
> 
> Are archery hunters NOT hunters?? No point even made here that I can see
> 
> 
> 
> I don’t remember you asking me that, but if you did the answer is no. Does that mean I don’t have a degree in wildlife Biology? Or Forestry management? Or that I studied those subjects? Does Jim have a degree in archery? Does a person have to have a classical degree in a subject to know about it? Did Jefferson have a degree in physics, Lincoln in political science, Van Gough (sp) in art?


YOU brought up the degrees thing, then said I had NO clue, yet I had asked on two seperate occasions(that I can remember where and about when as of now)......I don't really care.........get a job and make a real difference IF you're qualified.......instead of being here, where I doubt you are making much of a difference to most......:cocktail: 

IT was a group of narrow minded people who spewed forth such nonsense that has delayed the crossbow expansion in Ky against the majority's wishes......I've seen some of the most outrageous claims made........from those who know better........it's sickening to see other hunters treat their own in such a manner, somehow you "think" you're helping bowhunting.....you and those are not and are in fact hurting all hunting........when you debate topics relevent facts come in "handy", I am still waiting on some from you........get 'em yet?


----------



## Free Range

> YOU brought up the degrees thing, then said I had NO clue, yet I had asked on two seperate occasions(that I can remember where and about when as of now)......I don't really care.........get a job and make a real difference IF you're qualified.......instead of being here, where I doubt you are making much of a difference to most......


What the heck are you talking about now? I brought up the degree thing? Me get a job, and make a difference? So because you can’t debate you sink to this? Instead of being here? You can’t handle the truth so you ask that I leave? 



> ......I've seen some of the most outrageous claims made........from those who know better........it's sickening to see other hunters treat their own in such a manner


Me too. like bigot, like snob, like selfish, like apartheid, like raciest. Like narrow minded. Like spew, like you are hurting bow hunting. It is outrageous the tactic some use here. And as for relevant facts, I have brought them, but it’s not my turn, if you remember you brought what you consider facts, then as we were exploring them we got hung up because you refuse to discuss them and refuse to answer questions you brought up. So until the time comes that you can carry on a civil debate, and explore the “facts” you print, we will be at a stall.


----------



## Jim C

You have not provided any relevant facts FR-your entire argument is you don't want anymore people hunting in a season you think should be reserved to the "worthy"


----------



## Free Range

And you haven’t provided any thing relevant at all, fact or no. You lie about me not wanting anyone else in the woods, and call people names and try to discredit them with ridicule, lies and half truths. If you cannot follow the line of thinking, and discuss it in a worthy manner, then stay out of the discussion all together, it would be doing us and yourself a big favor.


----------



## aceoky

Yes F-R IF you have the education and qualifications, then get a F&W job and make a REAL difference in your state.....simple as that, IF you can, why not do......

Again, if those who want exclusion show a GOOD reason rather than selfish ones(plural btw), then they wouldn't be known for what they are.......selfish.....another fact

YOU want to "disucss the facts" I print and "debate" them, but you have nothing to use for that, your saying the GA SENIOR bilogists "opinion' is no more valuable than yours, is "out there" at best.....most will side with the one with the job of discussing the data that HE has and we do not have........you refuse to see that, thus there is no way to have a "civil debate" about an "expert opinion" when compared to a non-expert's opinion(that would be you)......(just for one example) Then when I show the CWD scare was NOT an opinion, you have nothing to say, you see, civil debates are much easier when both sides use some actual facts to support at least some of their claims; and you have none to do that with, we've waited and still are for them........so where are they?

I've shown what the Ky hunters want, you don't care, well, I do......and the HOW of what was done is even more important to me then what it was all about(expansion).....there was NO reason to go to the lengths and impose the indisputable risks; caused by the same type of "bow clubs" that you expound so "rightously" about....!! Period, if they couldn't defeat this by using the measures already in place, then they lose, as always and as we would have done.....but NO "the end justifies the means" was the norm for them, and sadly that affected and effected all hunters even those with NO opionion on the expansion......that IS a fact as well.....

It's interesting that a well known opponent of crossbow's full expansion, stated in the public forum(and he's a lawyer btw), that I was correct on the risks involved with sb211 and as badly as he was opposed to full expansion he would fight sb211 along side with me!!

But some selfish people don't care about "fair play", or what's "right", so long as they get their way and keep others out.........at any cost no less!

As for the "narrow mined" folks in Ky they are what they are, they have never shown any good reason for fighting the expansion that is PROVEN to be wanted by the majority, two surveys and the LKS membership and BOD votes prove that(there are 30,000+ members of the LKS and the majority also voted pro expansion.....so much for "small sample sizes" as claimed etc)

NOW faced with the fact the majority in fact DO support the expansion, and NO proof ever shown why the majority of Ky hunters should not have the inclusion they've worked for, they ARE in fact "narrow minded" , only caring about keeping their own fellow hunters out of the woods, which they neither own nor control.........and yes others feel and are doing the exact same thing, and they are what they are, at everyone's expense, and sooner or later it will catch up to the whole group...

...it's already happening in Ky reports of the largest bowhunting org in the state say they've lost a bit more than 1/4 of their total membership over this, because they too were for full expansion, the club said "we exist to keep crossbows out of archery season, and that is what we will fight for"!......against the membership's votes and wishes!)

Yeah anyone can see how that's "good for bowhunting"......


----------



## Free Range

You’re a real piece of work. You say it’s outrageous the name calling going on, but turn around a TRY to justify calling names yourself. 

Oh and again why is it a man has lost his worth when he can no longer shoot a x-bow?


----------



## spec

Free Range is on to ya ace! Gotta love those self-appointed folks that believe they speak for every license-buying sportsman in the Commonwealth. Also ace, I believe you are mistaken about the first survey. As I recall the majority did not care one way or the other, so the pro-crossbow folks just lumped them in with their numbers. Believe it or not, there IS a difference. As for the 1/4 lost membership- go ahead and admit you have no proof as to why they left. Groups like that have a high turnover rate year-to-year anyway. So go ahead and let us all know why everyone but you is wrong and even do your best multi-wannabe tirade if you must. What you still haven't figured out is that you just may be your own worst enemy. Posts like you have posted are easy to print and send off to Frankfort and the voting legislature to show the tactics some use. I really believe you have incited more sportsmen/women to oppose the crossbow than to embrace it. Had you and that "numbers" fellow merely kept you mouths shut and not try to jam the entire process down everybodies throat you would have had crossbow the entire season. Gasset was 100% correct when he stated this to be a social issue- and it has shown what society has to offer.


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> Free Range is on to ya ace! Gotta love those self-appointed folks that believe they speak for every license-buying sportsman in the Commonwealth. Also ace, I believe you are mistaken about the first survey.
> 
> As I recall the majority did not care one way or the other, so the pro-crossbow folks just lumped them in with their numbers. Believe it or not, there IS a difference. As for the 1/4 lost membership- go ahead and admit you have no proof as to why they left. Groups like that have a high turnover rate year-to-year anyway. So go ahead and let us all know why everyone but you is wrong and even do your best multi-wannabe tirade if you must. What you still haven't figured out is that you just may be your own worst enemy. Posts like you have posted are easy to print and send off to Frankfort and the voting legislature to show the tactics some use. I really believe you have incited more sportsmen/women to oppose the crossbow than to embrace it. Had you and that "numbers" fellow merely kept you mouths shut and not try to jam the entire process down everybodies throat you would have had crossbow the entire season. Gasset was 100% correct when he stated this to be a social issue- and it has shown what society has to offer.


Yeah sure he is 

And you are badly mistaken in the first place, the majority on both surveys AND THE LKS votes were ALL for full expansion.......that is a fact! I have seen the original 2002 results several times and am not guessing btw.

Also those who "don't care" are the same as NOT opposed.......IF they're opposed as some of you wish to say, then they DO care! sheesh!

As for why they left........I have enough proof of several stating in open forums that they left over this issue(not to mention other "evidence" ).......did you expect a Grand Jury to convene?

The "high turnover rate" you mentioned seemed to "turn over" much more and quicker once this issue came about, but you're right it was probably only sheer conincidence....... 

Feel free to print off and send anything I've stated to them, I can assure you that I CAN and *will* back it up to them 100% and would have no problem or concerns in doing so.......be my guest, and thank you for your help! Once they begin to ask me to back it all up and I do just that......where will you guys then be? :cocktail: 

IF you knew how many members the LKS represents, then YOU should *know* since the majority of them voted for full crossbow expansion, it may well not be EVERY sportsmen, I never have claimed that.....I have claimed and stand by MY statements(as also stated by the KDFWR more than a few times btw) The *vast MAJORITY*...... support the expansion in KY......period! ...

There is NO need for everyone to agree (and IF that were the case we'd never get anything done because that will NEVER happen any more here than elsewhere)

Funny you guys want people to "think" there is all of this opposition, but can never manage to prove it, WE however can prove what the VAST majority of KY hunters want.....and that, whether you like it or not is full crossbow expansion........and I'd say it will happen before very long, glad to have your support on sending them this information, I appreciate it very much!

As for my "keeping my mouth shut" we'd had the whole season that is 100% false, I can PROVE I never even stated or posted ANY opinion on this matter once or AT ALL , prior to the first run to the legislature, just how much do you know, and how much do you want some to "think you know" about any of this???

I'm going to overlook the "muti-wannabe" it's in bad taste and no point in my bothering....

And IF you think, or otherwise believe, that by posting facts and data that support expansion, and by proving they(you?) have nothing on your side except the desire to keep other hunters out of the woods during "your season" rather than sharing with other hunters.......you're entitiled to that opinion, the "tons" of emails, and PMs that I get do tell ME otherwise, but then again facts don't really seem to matter to those who don't wish to share with thier fellow hunters......

Have a great summer........it's my guess your post is spawned by our working for another guy for the LKS president......nice try if that's the case, but we'll continue to do so.......and who knows our guy just may win........wouldn't that be a "shocker" for those who still maintain all this oppostion they can never seem to prove exists? :darkbeer: :cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Oh and again why is it a man has lost his worth when he can no longer shoot a x-bow?


AGAIN, post it up where I ever stated that! 

You know I didn't everyone here knows how long you've tried to get me to answer that stupid question I have not and will not.....

It's NOT gonna happen......IF you're so interested , then YOU answer it......I haven't and I will not, not now, not ever.......guess that is too hard for you to comprehend??? Too bad, get over it.......


----------



## aceoky

Since I have no way of knowing , spec , of how much you are aware of how things are done, I shall try to explain them to you and you should then be able to understand that in fact there is NO strong opposition, regardless of what some have tried to claim......

Ky is "split" into 9 Districs each of those has a commisioner who votes on such issues.......they also allow and request hunter's input on such matters(and you can believe they got a great deal on this issue, feel free to ask them all, I have done so) .......since there were NO .......Nay votes in December, you now have your "every hunter in KY" (that's interested enough to even comment at least AND if they didn't it's no one's fault but thier own......they had MORE than ample opportunity to do so......period)........HAD, the "input" been in oppostion, then they would have never voted Yea........it's not hard to understand, nor to comprehend or to see the facts are not what some want them to be at all!

What you have is two surveys proving what the majority of Ky hunters want, the LKS votes doing the same and a UNANIMOUS commision vote.......it's hard to make it any more clear than that, the majoirty do in fact support this, and any claims to the contrary to this point have never been proven, because they can't be........it's what people want in KY and those who don't care.......do not care, they are not opposed, which in fact means they see NO problems with it......period......no amount of "spin" will change that IF they had any problems with it then why wuoldn't they voice them? Oh yeah, they don't care, thus they have no problems with expansion, so yes for the purpose of what we're talking about...........

IF you were correct in the first survey the majoirty didn't care(again you are not even close btw), you'd still be incorrect.......either it's opposed by the majority or it isn't.......you can't be a "little pregnant" and either you don't want something or you do , or it doesn't matter to you either way.........in no way are they opposed......so IF given the other two choices one has to accept that since they are not opposed to this, and it was being done........they had NO problem with it (how is that not supporting it btw)? :wink:

On your other point about me being my worst enemy, I'll remind you it was not our side that lost the four commision votes they once had........I know why you hope I'll not state the facts and evidence.....and it won't work, the more people realize what was done and the 'dirty tricks" and outright lies that were told even on the radio program, no less to get "thier way" against the vast majoirty the more they will then realize who is for the hunters and who is not.....but in fact only care about themselves and what they want......


----------



## thesource

Multi-wannabee....

THAT's funny!:darkbeer:


----------



## spec

Please post the results of the 1st survey and we might decide for ourselves. I am very aware of how things are done in Ky and am quite aware of what happened here. As for your belief that I am working for another, perhaps you are just a little paranoid. I know not of whom you speak. Gotta scratch my head though, with all that support from all the commisioners and all the sportsmen and women for full expansion, how in the world did you end up with what you got? That is one fact that really gripes you- you did not receive full expansion.


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> Please post the results of the 1st survey and we might decide for ourselves. I am very aware of how things are done in Ky and am quite aware of what happened here. As for your belief that I am working for another, perhaps you are just a little paranoid. I know not of whom you speak.
> 
> Gotta scratch my head though, with all that support from all the commisioners and all the sportsmen and women for full expansion, how in the world did you end up with what you got?
> 
> That is one fact that really gripes you- you did not receive full expansion.


I'm *not* going to post the first survey, first it's four years old, the second survey was much more sceintific and current,(And independent for a reason you know, some said the Dept "fixed that one"......do YOU honestly think they'd made that claim IF what you think is correct?)  and you should know where to find it.....IF you want to "decide for yourself" on the first one, be my guest,.....but you'll have to find it for yourself..

I've stated what it said, take ir or leave it, I don't care to look for it, and again being that old and having a much more current survey proving the same thing there is NO good reason to do so......

I have no clue or idea where you get that I'm paranoid or that I care who you work for or do not.....

IF you are "well aware" of the process, then you know the majoirty want this, IF you're aware of what happened then you know why we got stuck with what we have.....you should also know it won't last that way....

And NO that is not the "one fact" that really gripes me.......

First it's the HOW of what was done(and what was done, cirvumventing the entire existing process, all the while those doing that accusing the KDFWR of doing what they WERE in fact doing when the Dept were in fact not......yet they were and knew they were)

Secondly, the FACT that it is wanted by a vast majority of hunters........and that being proven that other hunters would resort to such tactics and methods JUST to try to keep other archery hunters out of archery hunting......AND they have NO good reason , not one to oppose it, we've asked for the whole time, "why"? No good reasons yet, we have heard though about "velvet bucks in danger" LMAO

IN case you somehow missed it, WE have a LKS Resoloution to extend that from Oct 1 - Dec 31(not on/off/on/off whole thing)......

...and IF it becomes a reality, I have already stated that IS how to end this whole thing for my part, and most I've spoken with will also accept that.......and btw that is NOT full expansion.......but you know what? 

Since so many keep trying to put words into my mouth and saying that, I may just have to change my mind and see what I can do , in order to get the "whole thing"??? :darkbeer: :darkbeer: :cocktail: 

*I* have tried as hard as anyone could possibly try to get a fair and just compromise since before even the Cornell survey was done, and before we spent over $70,000 for it....to say I'm "upset" for not getting full expansion once again proves you say you know what is "what", but fail to produce any evidence, quite the contrary in fact.....

Actually now that I think about it, the better question is, IF there is so much oppostion for it, why did it in fact get a unanimous vote from the commsion? Because it does NOT have the opposition that is being claimed.......simple fact.....just as the fact have proven the majority do want this and will soon have what hey want......The Dept . can't and shouldn't cater to a select few agains the majority's wishes, and now the politicians are not so likely to look at this again......where do you think that suggests it is headed?


----------



## spec

Why bring up the results of two surveys if you prefer to tout one? If it is outdated, why mention it? Something in the results you prefer not reveal? So you are saying that you are not upset with the current result and would be happy to leave the latest move by Gassett as is?


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> Why bring up the results of two surveys if you prefer to tout one? If it is outdated, why mention it? Something in the results you prefer not reveal? So you are saying that you are not upset with the current result and would be happy to leave the latest move by Gassett as is?


I mention "it" because it proves this is not a "new" issue, and fact is, IF you've seen the Cornell survey it also mention it and the results.....but NO there is nothing in the results that I would care to reveal, however since I've spent a great deal of my time posting the actual facts of what DID transpire over the course of this whole "mess", it is now up to you to disprove the facts of the matter IF you're so inclined, or did you only enter into to this to try to start an argument? IF so, you're wasting your time, I'm not interested.....

Dr. Gassett "didn't make a move" other than for full expansion ever........being forced to comply to something by the Legislature is hardly a move, and had you bothered to read what I did in fact say, you would know exactly what I will and will not accept less than.......IF we don't get the Oct -Dec whole thing, bet on us getting it all......And NO I will not accept things as they are now.....this on/off/on/off is not acceptable in any way or regards to us.......period......and there is NO good reason for it in the first place( I had already stated that above anyway)

Which in the end we will anyway, the Dept. didnt' spend that much $ for nothing you know....:cocktail: 

I fully intend to have that pre-rut crossbow data, IF that means the whole archery season to get it , then that will be what is done, OR they can give us those few extra days they kept us out of as an insult, how is that "good will" or "in good faith"?? (ask why they didn't want US to have the pre-rut data.....could it be this way they can say they saved a bunch of deer from crossbows, but IF the data is available the truth they are another form of archery weapon and no more......hmm)

:darkbeer: 

It isn't....and it will NOT stand "as is", believe me or not, doesn't matter and won't matter, it's simple really IF anyone wants this to end now, this will be done, and if not........we'll keep right on fighting for the whole thing, it's up to them.....give us a little or we'll end up with the whole season as first proposed......I know where Dr. Gassett stands on this and the full commision as most should know.....some are playing with fire, they should know how to not be burned,we'll soon see IF they do or not...


----------



## spec

Also ace, since you are in such a giving mood, answer this. You mentioned that radio personality. Do you believe the call that your buddy "numbers" made was a pro or con for the efforts of crossbow expansion? Do you believe the commisioners were pleased with "numbers" actions as the pointman for the crossbow expansion? Do you believe his tirades helped the crossbow effort? Do you think that perhaps some sportsmen really didn't care one way or another, but got drawn into the fray by "numbers" spewing that "my way of you're an anti-hunter" venom? Easy questions- requiring easy answers.


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> Also ace, since you are in such a giving mood, answer this. You mentioned that radio personality. Do you believe the call that your buddy "numbers" made was a pro or con for the efforts of crossbow expansion? Do you believe the commisioners were pleased with "numbers" actions as the pointman for the crossbow expansion? Do you believe his tirades helped the crossbow effort? Do you think that perhaps some sportsmen really didn't care one way or another, but got drawn into the fray by "numbers" spewing that "my way of you're an anti-hunter" venom? Easy questions- requiring easy answers.


Yes that is very easy indeed!

No one person, or thier actions should ever come above the majority's wishes, if that is the case, then it's a sad state of affairs for our great state and the hunters.....

NOW your turn, HOW do you explain the Radio show's host, over and over and over stating what in his opinion was on the definintion of a "compromise" then he himself going against every single aspect of that (his definition ) for this "thing" some try to call a compromise??

While I'm at it, how about the 100% falsehood that aired on his show to gain support for sb211, and when the "error" was pointed out(and I KNOW it was, I sent him several emails with links to prove the truth).......the Regs were filed by the KDFWR for over a month before that show even aired! NOT only did he never even bother to answer the emails as far as I know and can find out he has NEVER made any retractions OR stated what was the truth........IS that what you support??

At least "numbers", hasn't been caught on the air lying over and over on several counts........shall we also discuss the Radio programs host on the 'velvet buck" stance or have you seen my poll results on the KY forum??? :darkbeer: :cocktail: 

NOW had he at least came on the air, and in the papers saying it was an honest mistake, I could admire that, he didn't, thus he's the worst of the worst, saying and doing whatever it takes or can be thought of to "win"........yeah, that's what Ky needs! NOT.... 

But he backed the stupid SB211 even after being notified(again I know he was) about all the risks involved in doing so, and last time I checked it was still on his website(probably a month or so ago!)......even after being killed, it seems he is "proud" to have been a part of trying to "ruin" Ky's proven system of wildlife management, still though some say he is a "friend of the sportsman".....I don't and have no use for anything he is ever involved with again, and I can assure you I'm far, far from being alone! Quite a few on the opposing side of this issue have also stated those feelings! Yep, we're losing real quickly .....not

We have all of the facts and data on our side; we are for the masses not a "select few", I'll never understand what is "so wrong" with that in the eyes of a few.....


----------



## spec

Perhaps the questions were too tough. Try again. 1) Pro or con? 2)Yes or no? 3) Yes or no? 4) Yes or no? Answer those and we can proceed.


----------



## aceoky

Maybe the answers are just too complex for you? 

At any rate, they're answered.......(mine at least, those I asked you are/were not), and this attempt to change the subject from that didn't work....I answered and as I said, it's now your turn to do so......


----------



## spec

My neighbor has a Dodge in his driveway, and now I have one on my computer. You unwillingness to answer those direct questions in a forthright manner speaks for itself.


----------



## Jim C

spec said:


> My neighbor has a Dodge in his driveway, and now I have one on my computer. You unwillingness to answer those direct questions in a forthright manner speaks for itself.



speaking of dodges-can you or any of your like minded posters tell us how you are objectively hurt by treating the xbow the same as other bows


----------



## thesource

STILL irrelevant....


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> STILL irrelevant....


Proof?


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> My neighbor has a Dodge in his driveway, and now I have one on my computer. You unwillingness to answer those direct questions in a forthright manner speaks for itself.


If you say so...... 

Using that as 'the guide" , what does your unwillingness to answer the questions say to others? :cocktail: 

I answered them, as I see fit, again it's your turn, I just love how you guys try to change the subject every time you don't have any real answers or real data or real stats or...

You'd love the focus to stay on the pro side and never have to account for your own actions you wanted to discuss the radio program so badly THEN........wonder why you won't answer my questions about it, and what transpired?? 

Again no one person (including Jim Strader) speaks for the majority of sportsmen/women, what one call did or didn't do is not nearly as relevent as someone using his own show to gain support for a stupid bill on false pretenses.....and being that to the best of my knowledge and belief, he's still never issued a retraction after knowing the facts for so long.........does speak for itself....

........."the end justifies the means" IS what that tells us all, there was a German man who thought the exact same way......most know his name very well indeed!

It's your turn, will you "dodge" and try to keep focus on the non relevent or the relevent?


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> My neighbor has a Dodge in his driveway, and now I have one on my computer. You unwillingness to answer those direct questions in a forthright manner speaks for itself.


If you say so...... 

Using that as 'the guide" , what does your unwillingness to answer the questions say to others? :cocktail: 

I answered them, as I see fit, again it's your turn, I just love how you guys try to change the subject every time you don't have any real answers or real data or real stats or...

You'd love the focus to stay on the pro side and never have to account for your own actions you wanted to discuss the radio program so badly THEN........wonder why you won't answer my questions about it, and what transpired?? 

Again no one person (including Jim Strader) speaks for the majority of sportsmen/women, what one call did or didn't do is not nearly as relevent as someone using his own show to gain support for a stupid bill on false pretenses.....and being that to the best of my knowledge and belief, he's still never issued a retraction after knowing the facts for so long.........does speak for itself....

........."the end justifies the means" IS what that tells us all, there was a German man who thought the exact same way......most know his name very well indeed!

It's your turn, will you "dodge" and try to keep focus on the non relevent or the relevent?


----------



## Free Range

> Perhaps the questions were too tough. Try again. 1) Pro or con? 2)Yes or no? 3) Yes or no? 4) Yes or no? Answer those and we can proceed.


As you can see Ace will not answer questions that he thinks will hurt his position. He is easy to back into a corner, but smart enough to see he is in one. Ace the Dodge Master.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> As you can see Ace will not answer questions that he thinks will hurt his position. He is easy to back into a corner, but smart enough to see he is in one. Ace the Dodge Master.


Again, I answered his questions, his "numbers" guy question is answered with the FACT the opposition lost FOUR commsion votes after that(among other things)........so I'd "guess" his "methods" didn't tick them off as badly as he hopes.....

The "funny" thing is the attempt to proclaim, I haven't answered questions in a feeble attempt to avoid answering the damaging questions about the attacks by the other side..... 

We can all see who's "dodge masters" and I'm not in the league of many of you guys, that there is no doubt about:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

F-R

YOU keep bringing up my "rules", so let's break them down for everyone to understand, *I* post real relevent data, which you attempt to use your opinions to discredit(try being the operative word here), when asked to provide your own data, you can't, won't or both......

Now one would expect, IF you are going to try to discredit relevent facts, data, and expert opinions with your own opinions, you should have to post some of your own data/facts to support your views?? But you don't, again........thus there is not much point in your trying to dispute other's data/facts when relevent when you can't or won't post your own, to again try to support your views......simple really, IF you get to do it, we should as well.......we don't because you can't or won't post it.....

Then you ask a stupid question which has nothing to do with what is being discussed, I refuse over and over to answer that question, then you attack an answer that I've never even given.......!!!

The definition of ___________ is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results....

The problem here is; I did in fact answer those questions(not the answer he hoped for, but answered anyway)...he has NOT answered mine, yet accuses me of "dodging".....that's funny.....in an ironic sort of way....


----------



## Free Range

Whats funny in a non ironic way is how you call opinion facts, only when it comes from you. I have on every occasion, shown your pitiful excuses for facts to be only opinion. 
Then as I’m showing you for the opinion-ator you are you attack me with non relevant stuff like accusing me of saying a hunter is of no worth to me after they can no longer shoot a bow. In the same post you imply that they are of worth as long as they can shoot a x-bow, (implication being they are of no worth after that point). I pointed out this hypocritical stance, and because you know it for the truth you refuse to answer. So I guess we know what the real answer would be. 
The fact is you never answer questions, you dodge and twist, and blather about your opinion like it is some gospel fact, when we all know it’s not. 
Got to go, look forward to your non facts you might try to answer this with.


----------



## aceoky

Here is my answer to that.....from a recent quote from you FR

"it's opinion, now it may well be opinion backed up by facts, but it's still opinion".......(my data is to you opinion backed up by facts, yet where are your facts to support your opinions???) 

THAT says "it all"........I have them you do not......period, and if you do, again(what's this fifteen times now?) please post them up, with some way to verify them(a URL link will do just fine).......:cocktail:


----------



## maxcam

*How pitiful!*

I see Ace is up to his old tricks over on this forum as well......

Boy Ace you claim to be a uniter and go to every forum you can find and stir the pot......

Ace you are not a uniter you are a divider.......You guys should come over to 

http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/

and check out some more of Ace's rants.......Cheers! :cocktail:


----------



## doctariAFC

maxcam said:


> I see Ace is up to his old tricks over on this forum as well......
> 
> Boy Ace you claim to be a uniter and go to every forum you can find and stir the pot......
> 
> Ace you are not a uniter you are a divider.......You guys should come over to
> 
> http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/
> 
> and check out some more of Ace's rants.......Cheers! :cocktail:


Here's a question. DOes this guy have anything to add to this forum, or did he pop in just to do a little trolling?

This "rant" adds nothing to the discussion.

We are all still waiting for the anti-side to present facts to back up the claims that continually get stated. To date, not a shred of evidence supports the anti-crossbow stance. Heck, I have been told no facts exist, only to see the pro-side trot out very reliable information from solid sources. Not a thing from the anti-side except emotion and smoke.

Come on, lets get some facts on the table to back up these claims. Prove your case with facts.


----------



## Jim C

doctariAFC said:


> Here's a question. DOes this guy have anything to add to this forum, or did he pop in just to do a little trolling?
> 
> This "rant" adds nothing to the discussion.
> 
> We are all still waiting for the anti-side to present facts to back up the claims that continually get stated. To date, not a shred of evidence supports the anti-crossbow stance. Heck, I have been told no facts exist, only to see the pro-side trot out very reliable information from solid sources. Not a thing from the anti-side except emotion and smoke.
> 
> Come on, lets get some facts on the table to back up these claims. Prove your case with facts.



there is a big xbow thread on the bowhunter section-same thing no facts-we have one guy saying we have to ban xbows so people are forced to learn how to shoot a bow.=that is the closest we got


----------



## Free Range

> "it's opinion, now it may well be opinion backed up by facts, but it's still opinion".......(my data is to you opinion backed up by facts, yet where are your facts to support your opinions???)


Very funny, Ace, as you know I was talking about the CWD, which had nothing to do with the x-bow, and just because you base your opinion on some facts that may or may not be related, does not in itself mean you are drawing the correct correlation. 

And if you had any reading and comprehension skills you would know I do back up my opinion with facts. Like the fact there was none of this in-fighting before the x-bow pushers started their intrusion into archery season, fact, my opinion is they are the ones hurting bowhunting because of this fact. Fact the tactic being used by the x-bow pushers is one of inclusion, and game management. My opinion backed up by this fact is it will lead to other weapon types wanting inclusion too. 
That’s enough brain cells waisted on you today, look forward as always to reading your spin and your opinion that my or may not be loosely based on some non relevant fact. 


Those that trust the ATF should do a little history search on their tactics. Ruby Ridge comes to mind.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Very funny, Ace, as you know I was talking about the CWD, which had nothing to do with the x-bow, and just because you base your opinion on some facts that may or may not be related, does not in itself mean you are drawing the correct correlation.
> 
> And if you had any reading and comprehension skills you would know I do back up my opinion with facts. Like the fact there was none of this in-fighting before the x-bow pushers started their intrusion into archery season, fact, my opinion is they are the ones hurting bowhunting because of this fact. Fact the tactic being used by the x-bow pushers is one of inclusion, and game management. My opinion backed up by this fact is it will lead to other weapon types wanting inclusion too.
> That’s enough brain cells waisted on you today, look forward as always to reading your spin and your opinion that my or may not be loosely based on some non relevant fact.
> 
> 
> Those that trust the ATF should do a little history search on their tactics. Ruby Ridge comes to mind.



MORE BS -why was it OK for compounds to push their way into a season that belongs to the public but its wrong for crossbows to do the same thing

what OTHER ARCHERY weapons are out there FR? what other weapons have "forced their way" into say the OHIO archery season which has allowed xbows for 30 years now

BTW FR-it was the FBI and the US Marshall's service that was responsible for Ruby Ridge-it wasn't the ATF that initially tried to recruit the former Green Beret to infiltrate the White Supremacists' compound but rather FBI. The ATF was used to to the entrapment but it was the Marshall's service which shot sammy weaver in the back and it was FBI sniper Lon HOriuchi-under illegal orders from Larry Potts of the FBI who killed Vicki Weaver


----------



## Free Range

And if he had said FBI and or US Marshall I would have said the same thing, how about that thing down in TX Waco I think it was? 

And what about compounds, you mean those things you must draw back with your own power, and hold with your own power, and do this when the game is in view, and use all the same concepts as in shooting a more traditional bow? Is that the thing you are talking about?


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> And if he had said FBI and or US Marshall I would have said the same thing, how about that thing down in TX Waco I think it was?
> 
> And what about compounds, you mean those things you must draw back with your own power, and hold with your own power, and do this when the game is in view, and use all the same concepts as in shooting a more traditional bow? Is that the thing you are talking about?



I am at a loss to understand the relevancy of what you are babbling about. YOu don't hold a compound purely with your own power-a machine holds 35-99% of the weight. Its a MACHINE. same concepts as traditional bows?

wrong- again. as Ann Hoyt noted-shooting a recurve teaches you how to shoot a bow, shooting a compound teaches you how to aim.

not that there is a problem with that-I want people to use whatever BOW they choose. stop worrying about your own ego and self worth when others don't want to do it "the hard way". after all, no matter how you hunt, someone else can claim you are doing it the easy way


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> I am at a loss to understand the relevancy of what you are babbling about. YOu don't hold a compound purely with your own power-a machine holds 35-99% of the weight. Its a MACHINE. same concepts as traditional bows?


Sorry, but that is just not true. Let off has nothing to do with what or who is holding the weight. The shooter is still holding ALL of the weight, no matter the reduction percentage. A machine may be responsible for the reduction, but the fact remains, you let go-the string moves forward.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> Sorry, but that is just not true. Let off has nothing to do with what or who is holding the weight. The shooter is still holding ALL of the weight, no matter the reduction percentage. A machine may be responsible for the reduction, but the fact remains, you let go-the string moves forward.



sounds like a semantic argument rather than a relevant point


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> sounds like a semantic argument rather than a relevant point


Maybe to you, but it is factually correct. Now, throw a draw-lock into the equation, and you would be correct, which is why even us vertical bow hunters oppose vertical bows used with such a device. See, I am an equal opportunity anti.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> Maybe to you, but it is factually correct. Now, throw a draw-lock into the equation, and you would be correct, which is why even us vertical bow hunters oppose vertical bows used with such a device. See, I am an equal opportunity anti.



me, I worry about myself, my students and I really dont get my shorts in a knot over what form of bow another guy wants to use. the tough part is getting the deer in range -not making the shot. If someone can get a moby buck within 30 yards he has done the job and what sort of bow he uses matters not to me


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> the tough part is getting the deer in range -not making the shot. If someone can get a moby buck within 30 yards he has done the job


Although I don't know what a moby buck is, I think I agree.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> Although I don't know what a moby buck is, I think I agree.



the pros at RELO used to refer to a huge buck as MOBY BUCK (after the great white whale moby dick) Revival's deer would be classified as MOBY BUCK


----------



## oldbhtrnewequip

PMantle said:


> Let off has nothing to do with what or who is holding the weight.


why the asterisk?


----------



## Jim C

oldbhtrnewequip said:


> why the asterisk?



Heeheee-brilliant:thumbs_up


----------



## PMantle

oldbhtrnewequip said:


> why the asterisk?


You mean P&Y? If so, I have an idea, but it has nothing to do with any discussion here.


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> the pros at RELO used to refer to a huge buck as MOBY BUCK (after the great white whale moby dick) Revival's deer would be classified as MOBY BUCK


Where was his posted? I still can't access the crossbow forum. No explanation either. As you know, I've posted exactly once there and have caused no problems there, ever.


----------



## Free Range

My guess would be because they are acknowledging that those taken with over 65% let-off are after the rules have been changed, with equipment that is easier to use then what was considered FC before the rule change. There that should start another tirade about what is or is not FC.


----------



## draw&release

aceoky said:


> The proof
> 
> (pay attention anti-expansion side; proof backs up claims, and actually means something to most)
> 
> 
> 1. 2006 = 28719* *23 day season, Saturday opener
> 
> 2. 2002 = 28120* *weekday opener
> 
> 3. 2003 = 27550*
> 
> 4. 2004 = 26405*
> 
> 5. 2005 = 25723*
> 
> 
> 6. 2001 = 23197
> 
> 7. 2000 = 18243
> 
> Funny, with a "declining flock", we in Ky manged to kill a record number of turkey! Even more "strange" is the crossbow "touted" as the destroyer of the flocks if expanded was a "non-issue"......



The TRUTH

(pay attention EVERYONE, truth backs up truth and should mean something to everyone)

These numbers aceo gives are for the SPRING season results, something no one has been concerned with over the xbow issue because the xbow has been a legal weapon for spring hunting...no expansion, nothing new. The concern is over the fall season...something that hasn`t happened yet. Will the xbow have a negative impact on the turkey numbers? We don`t know yet, we`ll just have to wait and see.

Funny you should even bother to mention this aceo, knowing that the spring season has nothing to do with with the resources concerns over the xbow issue. You might as well go ahead and post up the harvest numbers for the last few years for the deer too because no expansion had happened then either and maybe it will help your cause to show some more "proof" that there`s no need for concern for the resources. Nice try aceo but your "proof" is not proof of anything!


----------



## draw&release

Free Range said:


> But I believe no matter what weapon is allowed the DNR will make sure that 1) not enough are used to cause harm, or 2) if it does they will curtail it’s use.



Don`t be so sure of this Free Range, we have alot of people here in Kentucky talking about low populations of small game, turkey and deer. Just last night I had a lengthly conversation with a person that is in a very high position concerning our fish and wildlife issues. He said in a meeting with a well known insurance company our F&W commissioner, Dr. Gassett`s speech ended with "the only good deer is a dead deer." Now I dare anyone to say if that`s the feelings of the head of our Fish and Wildlife Department`s feelings that we don`t have an urgent need to be concerned about the resources of this state.


----------



## Jim C

Hmmm-my sockpuppet detector is starting to flicker rather strongly


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> Hmmm-my sockpuppet detector is starting to flicker rather strongly



Is someone serving a suspension?


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> Is someone serving a suspension?



a few on both sides got zapped from this forum in the last few weeks


----------



## thesource

1 each, I think, but this wouldn't be either of them. I think its a legitimate necomer, so be nice.


----------



## Free Range

Did Ace get the ax I haven't seen a post from him in a couple days?


----------



## Free Range

Speaking of Ace, I hear there is a new push in KY for more expansion already? Is this true?
And what about those numbers above, Ace did you really post some non relevant numbers, I find that shocking. :darkbeer:


----------



## spec

The push is nothing new. They had always intended to push until they got full expansion, that is why the "compromise" proposal was never taken seriously.


----------



## draw&release

Jim C said:


> Hmmm-my sockpuppet detector is starting to flicker rather strongly


Sorry JC but your detector is flawed, I`m just a hunter and not your average xbow hater. Only care about the resources. If you don`t believe what I said about aceo`s post ask him or even better check for yourself. And what I said about the commissioner saying the only good deer is a dead deer is not something I heard myself but comes from a reliable source. I wish I had heard it myself because if I did I`d be doing everything I possibly could to have him trying to find another job, and would hope any other hunter, even if they want to be able to hunt with a xbow feels the same way, still might see if anything can be done.

Yes Free Range, the push is on and it will happen sooner than later. Think about it, the only good deer is a dead deer...yes it will happen. There`s alot of people the fish and wildlife department isn`t fooling but until we get someone in charge that actually cares about the hunters things are only going to get worse.


----------



## Jim C

spec said:


> The push is nothing new. They had always intended to push until they got full expansion, that is why the "compromise" proposal was never taken seriously.


and rightfully so-it was unfair to keep xbows out the day compounds were let in. there is no rational argument on earth that justifies treating these two bows differently under the law


----------



## willie

draw&release said:


> ........... And what I said about the commissioner saying the only good deer is a dead deer is not something I heard myself but comes from a reliable source. I wish I had heard it myself because if I did I`d be doing everything I possibly could to have him trying to find another job, and would hope any other hunter, even if they want to be able to hunt with a xbow feels the same way, still might see if anything can be done.


If that source was truly "reliable" then what is holding you back?

You must have a doubt or two if you can't go by what your "reliable source" said..


----------



## willie

draw&release said:


> The TRUTH
> 
> (pay attention EVERYONE, truth backs up truth and should mean something to everyone)
> 
> These numbers aceo gives are for the SPRING season results, something no one has been concerned with over the xbow issue because the xbow has been a legal weapon for spring hunting...no expansion, nothing new. The concern is over the fall season...something that hasn`t happened yet. Will the xbow have a negative impact on the turkey numbers? We don`t know yet, we`ll just have to wait and see.


Let's see... 120,000 KY bowhunters killed *494 *fall turkeys in 2005 and you are worried about what some crossbowers might do? LOL...

Even if there were 120,000 crossbowers overnight (it took 18 years for crossbowers to catch up with vertical bowhunters in Ohio) the best they could do would be to double that number.

Would you post up how many fall turkeys the gun hunters kill with the fall expanded season? 

Ace's spring numbers are relevent as a dead turkey is a dead turkey.

BTW - the fall crossbow turkey season was offered to be removed from the bargaining. Denied by the bowhutners groups. 

Yes, crossbow expansion will happen. Just like every state some day.

Get used to it..


----------



## thesource

willie said:


> Yes, crossbow expansion will happen. Just like every state some day.
> 
> Get used to it..


Not in your lifetime - or anyone who is reading this. 

The vast majority of states still consider a crossbow in bowseason to be ILLEGAL for those who are not disabled....as it should be.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Not in your lifetime - or anyone who is reading this.
> 
> The vast majority of states still consider a crossbow in bowseason to be ILLEGAL for those who are not disabled....as it should be.



if the plan is to keep it illegal based on the stunning and persuasive arguments you have advanced I think you will fail. Saying something should be illegal just because you individual issues dictates it should be is hardly grounds for stupid laws source


----------



## thesource

Apparently you aren't very persuavive yourself, Jim, since most states consider your toy illegal in archery season for able hunters.

Incidentally, I was thinking about making a donation to NYB anticrossbow fund in your name - is this legal for me to do?

I think it would be pretty funny.


----------



## willie

thesource said:


> Not in your lifetime - or anyone who is reading this.


No matter as we are a patient lot... must be the bowhutner in us..


----------



## thesource

willie said:


> No matter as we are a patient lot... must be the bowhutner in us..


It might be the bowhutner - whatever that is.

Since you are no longer a bowhunter, that can't be it.

Must be a freudian slip - close to a bowhunter, but not exactly...ironic, yes?


----------



## ban_t

Source 
Looking at you Signiture and quoting Jay McAninch also after reading their mission statement. I ask you too help me out. If they are Merchants and do Trade shows of archery Equipment. Would it not be in their best intrest to promote Xbows. Since many of their Sponser's/ Members are the Manufactors of this type of equipment. I do understand that they are Promoting Achery, but does it not seem too reason that they would promote all types of equipment that They are involved with for manufacture. Not just Verticle bows?? 
I could assure that the board members will take this into thinking also as more states open more oppurtunities for x-bow. Would not you think So?? Jay maybe CEO but he answers too the members.
http://www.archerytrade.org/tradeshow07/index.html Read the purpose at the bottom of page. Also here is how you become a member http://www.archerytrade.org/membership.html
Just food for thought Source questions too ask
The strange thing too was That I never saw once any memtion of no xbows but plenty of sponsers/members that make them. I wonder how many they sell at those shows??? Are you supporting the right group?? I can tell that your veiws are completly againist xbows, but way support a group that elist's the manufactors of such a device?
I was just wondering
Thanks


----------



## willie

Just a two fingered typist. 

The right index finger gets ahead of the left index finger.

I never was much of a typist as I usually had my secretary do that for me..

Getting desperate that the only thing you have left is making light of a typo?

What's next, English lessons?

Maybe making fun of the other person’s names?

Maybe another cute little thesource remark about crossbows being for women only?


Desperation is sinking in for your camp…


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Apparently you aren't very persuavive yourself, Jim, since most states consider your toy illegal in archery season for able hunters.
> 
> Incidentally, I was thinking about making a donation to NYB anticrossbow fund in your name - is this legal for me to do?
> 
> I think it would be pretty funny.



I will make one to the Bellevue Hospital in your name just to keep up


----------



## thesource

ban_t said:


> Source
> Looking at you Signiture and quoting Jay McAninch also after reading their mission statement. I ask you too help me out. If they are Merchants and do Trade shows of archery Equipment. Would it not be in their best intrest to promote Xbows. Since many of their Sponser's/ Members are the Manufactors of this type of equipment. I do understand that they are Promoting Achery, but does it not seem too reason that they would promote all types of equipment that They are involved with for manufacture. Not just Verticle bows??
> I could assure that the board members will take this into thinking also as more states open more oppurtunities for x-bow. Would not you think So?? Jay maybe CEO but he answers too the members.
> http://www.archerytrade.org/tradeshow07/index.html Read the purpose at the bottom of page. Also here is how you become a member http://www.archerytrade.org/membership.html
> Just food for thought Source questions too ask
> The strange thing too was That I never saw once any memtion of no xbows but plenty of sponsers/members that make them. I wonder how many they sell at those shows??? Are you supporting the right group?? I can tell that your veiws are completly againist xbows, but way support a group that elist's the manufactors of such a device?
> I was just wondering
> Thanks


I have no doubt that ATA will prostitute itself for the crossbow dollar in the future....The point is that even they will not advocate for xbow in archery season. Sorry I need to explain it to you.

Mostly, it is there to remind a certain someone that the ATA does NOT speak for him in support of crossbows, even though he claims it does .... lol.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I have no doubt that ATA will prostitute itself for the crossbow dollar in the future....The point is that even they will not advocate for xbow in archery season. Sorry I need to explain it to you.
> 
> Mostly, it is there to remind a certain someone that the ATA does NOT speak for him in support of crossbows, even though he claims it does .... lol.



they have to do this to keep a few xbow hating compound bow makers happy-trust me, most of the ATA is pushing for xbows. the archery market right now is flat


----------



## ban_t

Well at least you are honest, you will support them I guess, Which would go againist what you are saying. That we never see Xbows Expansion in our Lifetime,Guess what it is happening in our lifetime. Well Va did Xbow hunt this last year and is that not where the ATA is based? Seems they have alot of influnece too. Or maybe did they Pormote All types of Achery. To Keep the Base up as many have said that we need too do and ban together not fight with each other. They say that in the Purpose of they do on the website.


----------



## thesource

What's the OFFICIAL position, Jim?

NO advocacy.

I thought so...you overreach time and time again. My job is to slap you back to reality...

SLAP! Consider yourself reprimanded.


----------



## thesource

ban_t said:


> Well at least you are honest, you will support them I guess, Which would go againist what you are saying. That we never see Xbows Expansion in our Lifetime,Guess what it is happening in our lifetime. Well Va did Xbow hunt this last year and is that not where the ATA is based? Seems they have alot of influnece too. Or maybe did they Pormote All types of Achery. To Keep the Base up as many have said that we need too do and ban together not fight with each other. They say that in the Purpose of they do on the website.


Although I am having some difficulty understanding your semi-literate ramblings, I think you are trying to suggest something that isn't true.

I agree - Let's band together and not fight with one another. Crossbow advocates need to keep their greedy hands off off bowseason and try to find a season of their own. If they do that, I'm certain they will have the support of real bowhunters, too.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> What's the OFFICIAL position, Jim?
> 
> NO advocacy.
> 
> I thought so...you overreach time and time again. My job is to slap you back to reality...
> 
> SLAP! Consider yourself reprimanded.


LOL source-reality-crossbow use is spreading

reality-there is no credible arguments on your side

reality-people like you are more and more being seen as selfish and contrary to the best interests of hunters

reality-we are losing bowhunters

reality-crossbows are more ethical for many people to use in todays fast paced world

reality-the average non hunter is more against wounded deer than easier achievement of accuracy

reality-most people don't buy into your cult like arguments against xbows

reality-its a recreational activity-selfish arguments against choice are contrary to most of this nation's values

reality-more people are in favor of xbows than against it

reality-backwards DNR's have been unduly influenced by loud mouthed minority selfish cults

reality-you are going to see you world come apart at the seams in the next few years


----------



## thesource

I could have fun with almost all of your "points", but let's pick this one, shall we? How do you propose to support this statement?



Jim C said:


> reality-more people are in favor of xbows than against it


I have seen the exact opposite here on AT, and elsewhere. What kind of data do you have to cash the check your big mouth just wrote?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I could have fun with almost all of your "points", but let's pick this one, shall we? How do you propose to support this statement?
> 
> 
> 
> I have seen the exact opposite here on AT, and elsewhere. What kind of data do you have to cash the check your big mouth just wrote?



you keep spewing a non scientific poll at AT which hardly is representative of people in general

the fact is source-you are losing and most people-when they get the facts, think its stupid to exclude one type of bow

as I said-It would be far easier to convince people on the street that trad bows ought to be banned rather than crossbows

again, wounding deer bothers the average person more than accuracy

your cult like arguments based on your own ego is hardly grounds for a persuasive argument


----------



## thesource

So we can assume that you actually have NO data, and were pulling this opinion from that shady spot you retrieve all the others you expect us to swallow.

DATA. Jim - your opinion means SQUAT!


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> So we can assume that you actually have NO data, and were pulling this opinion from that shady spot you retrieve all the others you expect us to swallow.
> 
> DATA. Jim - your opinion means SQUAT!



My opinion rates much higher than yours with more people on this forum source because you have no credibility or anyone who can vouch for you. Many people here think you are an anti hunter and you certainly no very little about archery


----------



## thesource

I doubt many people think I'm an anti-hunter, Jim. I doubt you do.

No matter - I could care less what you crossbows guys believe anyway.

I don't need to compare opinions or credibility - I have data. In NYS, a survey conducted by Cornell University (your alma matter, I believe) showed that a full 85% of the hunters polled showed that they would be less satisfied if crossbows were added to ANY season...even gun season.

Now that doesn't seem like "more people are in favor of xbows" to me, Jim.

That credibility of yours that you are always touting just took another whap in the mouth...lol.:wink:


----------



## thesource

Here's another slap in the face to your "credibility."

You have been saying for months that ATA is on your side. As you can see by my signature line, that is a lie.

What say you?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I doubt many people think I'm an anti-hunter, Jim. I doubt you do.
> 
> No matter - I could care less what you crossbows guys believe anyway.
> 
> I don't need to compare opinions or credibility - I have data. In NYS, a survey conducted by Cornell University (your alma matter, I believe) showed that a full 85% of the hunters polled showed that they would be less satisfied if crossbows were added to ANY season...even gun season.
> 
> Now that doesn't seem like "more people are in favor of xbows" to me, Jim.
> 
> That credibility of yours that you are always touting just took another whap in the mouth...lol.:wink:



LESS SATISFIED-LOL that is funny-how old is that-its been making the rounds at PBS for several years now. 

tell me what arguments you find persuasive that you would purvey to joe sixpack. I have yet to see an argument that appeals to anyone but Poop and Dung Cultists and selfish bowhunters

tell me what you would do to convince someone who really doesn't care much about bowhunting\

this ought to be funny or evasive


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Here's another slap in the face to your "credibility."
> 
> You have been saying for months that ATA is on your side. As you can see by my signature line, that is a lie.
> 
> What say you?



gee source-having been a member of the ATA, and having been to their trade shows, and actually knowing people who worked for the ATA I understand what is going on. every major xbow maker has a display at the ATA show

you are losing

come up with an argument that appeals to someone who doesn't bow hunt that is not filled with lies and we will see


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> this ought to be funny or evasive


Now THAT is funny since you have evaded answering the original question as to what data or information you have that would indicate that most people are in favor of crossbows......


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> gee source-having been a member of the ATA, and having been to their trade shows, and actually knowing people who worked for the ATA I understand what is going on. every major xbow maker has a display at the ATA show


And even though common sense says, therfore, that ATA would sell out bowhunting for the crossbow $$$$$ (and they are) they still do not dare alienate bowhunters by advocating xbow in bowseason.

Telling, yes?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Now THAT is funny since you have evaded answering the original question as to what data or information you have that would indicate that most people are in favor of crossbows......



face it source-the only arguments you have are cult like blather that appeals to the selfish segment of bowhunters. Your caterwauling about tradition and how a crossbow is unfair means NOTHING to the average person on the street or even many game department employees. You lost because the only people you appeal to are those who work on emotion

THERE IS NOT A SINGLE ARGUMENT YOU CAN POST that is a winning argument to those who do not bowhunt-ie the majority of people in this country


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> THERE IS NOT A SINGLE ARGUMENT YOU CAN POST that is a winning argument to those who do not bowhunt-ie the majority of people in this country



I don't need to post any arguement to convince those who do not bowhunt - they hate crossbows. At least us bowhunters are tolerant of crossbows in their own season or in gun seasons.

Every non-hunter I've talked to thinks that crossbows in bowseason would be cheating. They have respect for bowhunting - not crossbows, though.

In fact, that seems a good enough reason to keep them out on its own. Why tarnish a sterling reputation by merging with a stained one?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I don't need to post any arguement to convince those who do not bowhunt - they hate crossbows. At least us bowhunters are tolerant of crossbows in their own season or in gun seasons.
> 
> Every non-hunter I've talked to thinks that crossbows in bowseason would be cheating. They have respect for bowhunting - not crossbows, though.
> 
> In fact, that seems a good enough reason to keep them out on its own. Why tarnish a sterling reputation by merging with a stained one?



what moronic nonsense-my wife doesn't bow hunt-she doesn't hate crossbows. My mother and late father, and my two brothers never ever bowhunted-they don't hate crossbows. Every non hunter you have talked to-after you whine bout xbows? If would be like me claiming xbows are accurate but trads miss alot (and show them a 3D league I used to shoot in where half of my time was waiting on trads trying to find their arrows behind the 20 yard elk they whiffed) and then claim most non hunters I know want to ban trad bows because they wound game

I am still waiting for a good argument source-so far you are striking out. Your ego issues and cult's creed means nothing to most people


----------



## thesource

This shows how out of touch you are.

Crossbows have quite the negative image in most places (with no help from me, I might add.)

By the way - I don't have a problem with crossbows....only crossbows in bowseason.

But that doesn't change the perception that crossbows are cheating, rightly or wrongly that IS how they are percieved.

Using a crossbow during a gun season would warrant respect. The same crossbow wielded in a bowseason will earn you disdain in most places.

That is reality, dude.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> This shows how out of touch you are.
> 
> Crossbows have quite the negative image in most places (with no help from me, I might add.)
> 
> By the way - I don't have a problem with crossbows....only crossbows in bowseason.
> 
> But that doesn't change the perception that crossbows are cheating, rightly or wrongly that IS how they are percieved.
> 
> Using a crossbow during a gun season would warrant respect. The same crossbow wielded in a bowseason will earn you disdain in most places.
> 
> That is reality, dude.


reality is that most people don't have negative images and the only groups that are purveying anti xbow lies and disinformation are greedy bowhunters. Prove your claim Source citing something other than propaganda spewed by anti xbow greed mongers


----------



## thesource

You are a demanding son of a gun.

You still haven't proven that you have ANY organizations that back xbow in bowseasons (although you claimed you do).

Obviously, we have removed ATA from your column and added it to mine. I, of course, have the premier bowhunting organization P&Y, NABC,all of the state orgs.

I looked at FITA and NAA for you - nothing about hunting. I even put "hunting" into the search engine at each site and came up empty.

For those keeping score...

Source - ALL
JimC - NONE

LOL


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You are a demanding son of a gun.
> 
> You still haven't proven that you have ANY organizations that back xbow in bowseasons (although you claimed you do).
> 
> Obviously, we have removed ATA from your column and added it to mine. I, of course, have the premier bowhunting organization P&Y, NABC,all of the state orgs.
> 
> I looked at FITA and NAA for you - nothing about hunting. I even put "hunting" into the search engine at each site and came up empty.
> 
> For those keeping score...
> 
> Source - ALL
> JimC - NONE
> 
> LOL


still babbling source-the ATA is hardly on your side Poop and DUng's NABC is a sockpuppet they created-you can't count them twice

How many people do they represent? I see you can't back up your blather about xbows having a negative image other than the crap created by Poop and Dung and other selfish cults


----------



## thesource

I'm looking - its called "research", you should try it as opposed to talking out your hind end when you say that ATA supports crossbows in bowseason and I can research a signature line that makes you look really stupid every time I post .... lol.

Your orgs, Jim....find an official position supporting crossbows from the orgs you "claim" to. Your credibility (or whay little is left of it) is on the line....


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I'm looking - its called "research", you should try it as opposed to talking out your hind end when you say that ATA supports crossbows in bowseason and I can research a signature line that makes you look really stupid every time I post .... lol.
> 
> Your orgs, Jim....find an official position supporting crossbows from the orgs you "claim" to. Your credibility (or whay little is left of it) is on the line....



I am still waiting for a rational argument supporting your position source-your ego issues don't count

the ATA had several displays of crossbow makers-all of them were geared towards hunting

call it what you want source but Jay is merely giving lipservice to the few archery makers who think xbows will hurt their sales


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I see you can't back up your blather about xbows having a negative image other than the crap created by Poop and Dung and other selfish cults


You can't help setting up those hanging curves, can you Jim?:tongue: 

I consider this to be a negative image:

_
"Rightly or wrongly, many woodlot owners would see a person with a crossbow as carrying a medieval weapon and up to no good," said Peter Lawrence the Small Woodland Owners Association of Maine, which opposed the bill."_

You know, making you look like a complete chump never gets old. LOL :darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> call it what you want source but Jay is merely giving lipservice to the few archery makers who think xbows will hurt their sales


Pure dishonesty.

The OFFICIAL position of ATA is to never advocate xbow in bowseason....period.

You have yet to show a HUNTING organization who's OFFICIAL position supports crossbows in bowseason.

You have yet to show an ARCHERY organization who's OFFICIAL position supports crossbows in bowseason (even though they shouldn't count anyway).

You have yet to show anything but your own loudmouthed opinions of organization's opinions.

Credibility? What credibility? A joke, thinks I .....


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You can't help setting up those hanging curves, can you Jim?:tongue:
> 
> I consider this to be a negative image:
> 
> _
> "Rightly or wrongly, many woodlot owners would see a person with a crossbow as carrying a medieval weapon and up to no good," said Peter Lawrence the Small Woodland Owners Association of Maine, which opposed the bill."_
> 
> You know, making you look like a complete chump never gets old. LOL :darkbeer:



I wouldn't know-you have yet to do it-the consensus is source- I have thrashed you for months

babbling on emotion and having to come out against choice after you admit that choice doesn't hurt anything is pretty tought row to hoe source.

right now all you have is false perceptions and your own mental issues

It seems every 6 to 9 months we hear of more xbow opportunities
I guess you call that winning

its like Carry permits-at first the myths were winning but as one state after another legalized carry weapons, more and more data was generated blowing through the myths


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Pure dishonesty.
> 
> The OFFICIAL position of ATA is to never advocate xbow in bowseason....period.
> 
> You have yet to show a HUNTING organization who's OFFICIAL position supports crossbows in bowseason.
> 
> You have yet to show an ARCHERY organization who's OFFICIAL position supports crossbows in bowseason (even though they shouldn't count anyway).
> 
> You have yet to show anything but your own loudmouthed opinions of organization's opinions.
> 
> Credibility? What credibility? A joke, thinks I .....



MOre stupidity from source-groups like the IBO and the NFAA may not advocate it (they too have their selfish greedy forces they have to deal with) but they certainly don't advocate against it and their ACTIONS clearly help us. you see, when the stupid claim xbows aren't archery IBO and the NFAA actions destroy that nonsense


----------



## Jim C

by the way source, NABC and Poop and DUng ARE NOT ARCHERY ORGANIZATIONS-they are selfish bowhunting organizations

remember-you have told us for most of your 2000+ points that bowhunting is not archery.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Prove your claim Source citing something other than propaganda spewed by anti xbow greed mongers



Here's a headline guaranteed to win friends and influence people....

*If Guns Are Outlawed, Outlaws Will Use Crossbows*

or this:

NOAA FISHERIES OFFER $1,000 REWARD FOR INFORMATION ON CROSSBOW SHOOTING OF CALIFORNIA SEA LION


Oooh, boy. There are a few bad apples, aren't there?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Here's a headline guaranteed to win friends and influence people....
> 
> *If Guns Are Outlawed, Outlaws Will Use Crossbows*
> 
> or this:
> 
> NOAA FISHERIES OFFER $1,000 REWARD FOR INFORMATION ON CROSSBOW SHOOTING OF CALIFORNIA SEA LION
> 
> 
> Oooh, boy. There are a few bad apples, aren't there?



sounds like you do work for PETA source. I hope outlaws use crossbows-I have my M4.

I don't see any citations supporting your PETA sentiments

I am still waiting a rational argument that isn't based on your and your fellow travelers egos against crossbows


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> MOre stupidity from source-groups like the IBO and the NFAA may not advocate it (they too have their selfish greedy forces they have to deal with) but they certainly don't advocate against it and their ACTIONS clearly help us. you see, when the stupid claim xbows aren't archery IBO and the NFAA actions destroy that nonsense



WRONG. Wrong. They either advocate or they do not.

Having a SEPARATE class for crossbows can hardly be considered advocating for the inclusion of xbow into bowseason....far from it. it clearly demonstrates that they should be separate,

FACE IT, you are dusted. EVERY important bowhunting organization is opposed to your cause. Even your beloved archery orgs won't take a stand.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> WRONG. Wrong. They either advocate or they do not.
> 
> Having a SEPARATE class for crossbows can hardly be considered advocating for the inclusion of xbow into bowseason....far from it. it clearly demonstrates that they should be separate,
> 
> FACE IT, you are dusted. EVERY important bowhunting organization is opposed to your cause. Even your beloved archery orgs won't take a stand.



they don't count-they exist for the selfish interests of their membership
they don't exist for the overall good of hunting or the public.
Pro crossbow groups are bowhunting groups and they support xbow hunting

that is as legit as Poop and Dung and their sockpuppet NABC

anyone who claims xbows are the greatest single threat to bowhunting should be laughed out of hunting


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> sounds like you do work for PETA source. I hope outlaws use crossbows-I have my M4.
> 
> I don't see any citations supporting your PETA sentiments
> 
> I am still waiting a rational argument that isn't based on your and your fellow travelers egos against crossbows



No need to act like a jerk - you asked for it. If you would get off your lazy rear and do your own research, or just accept my learned opinion in the first place we wouldn't have to go through this type of thing.


"I want, I'm waiting, I need ....." You are like a 4 year old.

Do a search. I have written plenty of positions on this forum...do some work.

Don't be "lazy" .... LOL.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> they don't count-they exist for the selfish interests of their membership
> they don't exist for the overall good of hunting or the public.
> Pro crossbow groups are bowhunting groups and they support xbow hunting
> 
> that is as legit as Poop and Dung and their sockpuppet NABC
> 
> anyone who claims xbows are the greatest single threat to bowhunting should be laughed out of hunting


The dwindling whimpers of a man defeated, whose beloved "credibility" has been scattered to the winds.

You have been schooled with regards to bowhunting and archery orgs positions on crossbows....we all know now you are on your own.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> No need to act like a jerk - you asked for it. If you would get off your lazy rear and do your own research, or just accept my learned opinion in the first place we wouldn't have to go through this type of thing.
> 
> 
> "I want, I'm waiting, I need ....." You are like a 4 year old.
> 
> Do a search. I have written plenty of positions on this forum...do some work.
> 
> Don't be "lazy" .... LOL.



lazy? all you do on AT is whine about xbows while I spend at least a couple hours a week trying to help people with archery. Your only argument against xbows is a selfish mental issue driven position that seeks to deny others their choice of bow in a recreational activity-you put your ego and sense of self worth about the enjoyment of thousands and you whine about "wanting" and "needing"

face it source-we have two values-the value of choice, freedom and the ability of thousands to enjoy a worthwhile recreational activity -a choice and freedom you have CONCEDED hurts nothing objectively, and on the other hand we have the greed, ego and self esteem problems of people who use bowhunting and their image as bowhunters as their only source of self esteem

given that division, you and your ilk should lose because you want to objectively restrict other people for no good reason


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> The dwindling whimpers of a man defeated, whose beloved "credibility" has been scattered to the winds.
> 
> You have been schooled with regards to bowhunting and archery orgs positions on crossbows....we all know now you are on your own.



poor source-his allies are greed and selfishness and people with self esteem problems


----------



## willie

"The crossbow issue like several other problems is emotionally charged and fraught with history and *bias.* We believe the only productive course of action for reasonable people is to work hard to focus on the facts and try to understand all points of view – *these issues are hard enough to resolve without the chaos created by misinformation or closed minds.*

Based on the foregoing, we have concluded that our best course of action is to continue our patient, *inclusive*, open approach to protect and promote archery and bowhunting while allowing all parties to evaluate the facts and form their own conclusions about our efforts.'

Sincerely,
Jay McAninch
CEO/President

Basically the ATA has taken a hands off approach on "advocating" the use of crossbows in archery seasons. They are leaving that decision up to the state's DNRs.

I *KNOW* that if a state DNR asks for crossbow specific information from the ATA they will get it.

(Emphasis is mine)


----------



## Free Range

Hey what happened to the LKS president, I think his name is Ronnie? I thought the all so powerful x-bow contingent in KY was going to have him replaced by someone that was more pro x-bow? I guess all the bad mouthing of this fine gentleman didn’t work.


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> Hey what happened to the LKS president, I think his name is Ronnie? I thought the all so powerful x-bow contingent in KY was going to have him replaced by someone that was more pro x-bow? I guess all the bad mouthing of this fine gentleman didn’t work.


Winning by 9 votes is hardly a mandate is it?


----------



## Free Range

Maybe not, but it’s still a win.


----------



## Free Range

> reality-crossbows are more ethical for many people to use in todays fast paced world


If, true wouldn’t it be more ethical for them to use a gun?



> reality-the average non hunter is more against wounded deer than easier achievement of accuracy


Are you trying, in a pathetic way, to say x-bow wound less deer? 



> reality-its a recreational activity-selfish arguments against choice are contrary to most of this nation's values


Like recreational sex and the choice to have an abortion? 



> reality-more people are in favor of xbows than against it


Only in your dreams.



> reality-backwards DNR's have been unduly influenced by loud mouthed minority selfish cults


I always like the “everyone is wrong but me” argument.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> If, true wouldn’t it be more ethical for them to use a gun?


pay attention-its archery season. four months of gun use would have deleterious impact on most herds. bringing guns up usually is the sign of a weak argument





Free Range said:


> Are you trying, in a pathetic way, to say x-bow wound less deer?


Its the clear implication that you and your ilk purvey when you claim that xbows are easier to master combined with no guarantee that people actually practice. Poop and Dung, the Professional BS etc apparently are against accuracy





Free Range said:


> Like recreational sex and the choice to have an abortion?


a stupid comment that proves how lame the archery apartheid cultists are. 





Free Range said:


> Only in your dreams.


the reality hurts the selfish cultists. I dream that one day you can actually fashion an argument that is based on logic that has any merit. 





Free Range said:


> I always like the “everyone is wrong but me” argument.



in reality you have always been wrong on this issue and my side is right because what we have is your greed trying to restrict the legitimate recreational choices of others for no other reason than your selfishness.


----------



## Free Range

more name calling? Oh yeah this is Jim, so it's expected


----------



## Free Range

Willie, I’m hearing something about a x-bow resolution, how did that go? I hear it was beaten soundly.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> more name calling? Oh yeah this is Jim, so it's expected



I haven't called names-I have said your position is based on greed and selfishness and I stand by that based on your own admission of wanting less people in the woods combined with your inability to actually fashion an argument that is supported by any facts other than a fear that xbows will mean more people in "your" season


----------



## PMantle

Wow, Jim and willie are getting pwned. 
:moviecorn


----------



## Free Range

You can dress it up however you want, but we all know it’s name calling and if you can’t discuss this without resorting to name calling then,,,, well like I said it’s expected.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> You can dress it up however you want, but we all know it’s name calling and if you can’t discuss this without resorting to name calling then,,,, well like I said it’s expected.



A funny rant given your side relies on stuff such as calling all crossbow hunters lazy, cheaters or "non bowhunters" or slobs etc.

As to PM's claim-proclaiming something is about all he has-the fact is is that the anti xbow side has no factual arguments at all


----------



## Free Range

> From: David Farbman, Commissioner and CEO
> Date:June 12, 2006
> Re:World Hunting Association
> 
> Dear fellow hunters:
> 
> I want to personally welcome you to the WHA, a new professional competitive world tour designed by
> hunters, for hunters. I have been an avid hunter for more than 20 years and have hunted with nearly
> every weapon. Hunting is my passion, and I am now dedicating my life to the sport. In addition, our
> team and supporters are largely comprised of experienced and passionate hunters.
> 
> The World Hunting Association intends to expand the next generation of hunters and hunting fans by
> showcasing the true essence of hunting and by offering exciting and educational content to provide
> more people facts about hunting. We are also creating a foundation which will donate to charitable
> and non-profit organizations that help enhance hunting, such as venison donation charities, and that
> offer hunting trips to those who are critically ill or less privileged.
> 
> Many people are very interested in finding out more details on the WHA and how we will achieve our
> goals. Over the coming months, we will unveil:
> 
> •Details about the competitions and tournament format.
> 
> •The darting process and procedures, including the recovery, release and treatment process.
> 
> •Exciting features on the full-scale, interactive worldhunt.com website.
> 
> •The positive impact the WHA will have on conservation, including aging of animals, vaccinations
> against widespread disease found in deer herds, and other valuable scientific and wildlife impacts.
> 
> •Valuable tips relating to deer management and crop management.
> 
> •The culling process that we use to thin the herd in a responsible and educated manner (taking place
> outside of the tournament format).
> 
> •The hunting-related charitable organizations that will be the recipients of WHA donations.
> 
> Let’s face it: our sport could use a “shot in the arm.” The number of licensed hunters has been
> declining for years and many people view hunters and hunting in an inaccurate and unflattering way.
> It’s time to improve that image and show the world the complexity, skill, and strategy that is the core
> of hunting.
> 
> While additional details of the WHA will be disclosed in the coming months, I want you to understand
> some of the core elements of the competitions:
> 
> •Although, for purposes of broadening viewership, the competition will be based on “non-fatal” hunting,
> we completely support harvest hunting.
> 
> •The WHA competition will focus on many of the same skills required in harvest hunting, including
> scents, positioning, scent elimination, stand strategies, gauging and playing the wind, and many
> other practices.
> 
> •The scoring system will reward competitors for their hunting skill. While the animals will not die, the
> hunt itself will be challenging and intense.
> 
> •To preserve ecology, the animals will be given certain vaccinations and will have blood work
> completed immediately by a licensed veterinarian; animals will be marked and not shot twice in
> a competition.
> 
> *Now is the time for all hunters to stand together, shoulder to shoulder. While new ideas and change
> can sometimes be uncomfortable, this is a great opportunity for hunters to elevate the sport, clear up
> misconceptions, and expand the next generation of hunters.
> 
> Let us unite as hunters and work together to grow the sport.* I welcome your feedback and suggestions
> as we are building the tour. Please send feedback to [email protected]. When we launch
> the first event in the fall, it will be our tour, designed especially for hunters like us.
> We should all be proud.
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> 
> David Farbman
> Commissioner and CEO, WHA




Please read the bolded parts, sound like anyone we know?


----------



## Jim C

you ought to be on the fishing forum-discussing RED HERRINGS

bottom line

1) many people enjoy hunting deer with crossbows

2) these people want to use their crossbows in archery season just like compound archers

3) these people have lobbied for inclusion just as the compound archers did

4) no one has yet to come up with an objective argument as to why these peoples' wish to be treated the same as compound bows is deleterious to the public good

5) the only arguments are based on internal issues of other bowhunters


----------



## spec

great post freerange! Kinda sounds like something some of have heard(or spoken) before doesn't it?


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> Willie, I’m hearing something about a x-bow resolution, how did that go? I hear it was beaten soundly.


No surprise there are all considering the amount of bowhunter clubs voting.

The vote just re-affirmed their greed and selfishness.


----------



## willie

PMantle said:


> Wow, Jim and willie are getting pwned.
> :moviecorn


So says the sock puppet..


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> Please read the bolded parts, sound like anyone we know?


That is pretty low, even for you..

We've all come together to stop Mr. Farbman (hopefully) and you then turn around and do this.

No shame or is your side that morally bankrupt?


----------



## thesource

I agree -

I find the similarities eerily familar.

Its ironic (hypocritical) that crossbowers spout "choice" and "what harm does it do" about stringguns but are outraged by WHA.

Meanwhile, bowhunting defenders stay active on both fronts with consistency, since they are protecting their sport from harm wherever it may come from.... it should make reasonable people stop and scrutinize the rhetoric that is virtually identical, right down to the "you must be an antihunter if you don't support this!" screeching.

To be fair to JimC - he has not weighed in on the WHA debacle. He may stay consistent, preaching "choice" above bowhunting's integrity and safety and in the face of overwhelming bowhunter opposition. Or he may demonstrate the hypocrisy that so many other stringgunners have by saying "My choice is acceptable, your choice is not...."

It is lose - lose either way.

Willie, on the other hand, has shown his stripes. He is willing to protect his version of bowhunting....as long as we bend our definition of bowhunting to fit his rules. When he is outside looking in, he is the victim. When he is in the driver's seat, he has shown he can be as exclusionary as the next. 

Hypocrisy is all over this controversy - unless you happen to have been protecting bowhunting from all those who wish to corrupt it.


----------



## thesource

willie said:


> That is pretty low, even for you..
> 
> We've all come together to stop Mr. Farbman (hopefully) and you then turn around and do this.
> 
> No shame or is your side that morally bankrupt?


Oh bullcrap, Willie.

Talk about morally bankrupt!

"What objective harm would 8 guys darting whitetails on the next 40 have on your ability to (cross)bow hunt?"

LOL - you have been exposed .... deal with it.:shade:


----------



## willie

Only a class A idiot would draw a parallel between hunting with a crossbow and this WHA abomination.

Looks like you qualify..

"Deal with it..."


----------



## Jim C

willie said:


> So says the sock puppet..



what would happen if they mated


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Oh bullcrap, Willie.
> 
> Talk about morally bankrupt!
> 
> "What objective harm would 8 guys darting whitetails on the next 40 have on your ability to (cross)bow hunt?"
> 
> LOL - you have been exposed .... deal with it.:shade:



Just when I thought the source had hit rock bottom, he has rented a steam shovel :thumbs_do :thumbs_do


----------



## Jim C

willie said:


> Only a class A idiot would draw a parallel between hunting with a crossbow and this WHA abomination.
> 
> Looks like you qualify..
> 
> "Deal with it..."



right you are willie


----------



## thesource

You two are too funny.

We are drawing a parallel between the lame excuses used to justify WHA and your lame excuses to try and justify crossbows in bowseason.

Real bowhunters will protect bowhunting from EVERYTHING that doesn't belong there. They will prevent those who pretend to be bowhunters from calling what they do "bowhunting" when it is clearly not.

You have been exposed as hypocrites - and your lame justification has been exposed right along with you. 

If the stupid "how does it hurt you" arguement is good for the goose, then its good for the gander.

The glaring truth is obvious in the context of WHA - it is not about how it hurts any one individual. It is about how it might hurt BOWHUNTING itself, which is infinitely more important.

It is ironic that you can see that big picture when it comes to WHA, yet fail to see it when the issue is crossbows.

I do not expect you to see the light of understanding and switch your position because of this. But it should be much clearer to you that those who defend bowhunting against crossbows do so with the same intentions, the same motives, and the same principles as those that oppose WHA.

It is not greed or selfishness, as you both prattle on about. It is about principle. It is about protecting bowhunting.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You two are too funny.
> 
> We are drawing a parallel between the lame excuses used to justify WHA and your lame excuses to try and justify crossbows in bowseason.
> 
> Real bowhunters will protect bowhunting from EVERYTHING that doesn't belong there. They will prevent those who pretend to be bowhunters from calling what they do "bowhunting" when it is clearly not.


yep, "real bowhunters" tried to keep releases out, they tried to keep compounds out, they tried to keep mechanical heads out. They lost and they are going to lose on crossbows. The sad fact is that they now have to support all those inventions lest they be relegated to being seen as both selfish greedy whiners and IRRELEVANT





thesource said:


> You have been exposed as hypocrites - and your lame justification has been exposed right along with you.
> 
> If the stupid "how does it hurt you" arguement is good for the goose, then its good for the gander.


another one of your moronic platitudes-you tend to make lots of conclusory statements that are supported neither by fact nor logic. You should stick to fishing given your infatuation with red herrings.



thesource said:


> The glaring truth is obvious in the context of WHA - it is not about how it hurts any one individual. It is about how it might hurt BOWHUNTING itself, which is infinitely more important.
> 
> It is ironic that you can see that big picture when it comes to WHA, yet fail to see it when the issue is crossbows.


I love how you fixate on this recent news tidbit and try to use it to justify your psychological issues that cause you to worry (99% of your 2000+ posts) about what other type of bow other taxpayers want to use in a publicly created recreational activity. Its obvious you need to get some help with your self confidence problems and stop worrying so much what others use-other than you and the cult that thinks like you the average man of the street couldn't care less if you arrow a deer with a compound or a crossbow and if they aren't against the concept of hunting-they probably want you to do it accurately. If they are against hunting, it matters not to them either. THE ONLY GROUPS whining about xbows specifically are the greedy egotists who claim to be pro bowhunting. 



thesource said:


> I do not expect you to see the light of understanding and switch your position because of this. But it should be much clearer to you that those who defend bowhunting against crossbows do so with the same intentions, the same motives, and the same principles as those that oppose WHA.
> 
> It is not greed or selfishness, as you both prattle on about. It is about principle. It is about protecting bowhunting.


greedy whiners who defame other bowhunters with the prattle that they are cheaters, lazy or that they are the greatest threat to bowhunters are a cult that hunting in general would be better off if they would shut up and go away.

again-the only groups demonizing xbows are the cult of the greed


----------



## willie

We have no "lame excuses". 

Just sound reasoning which you have yet to rebut successfully.

Of course with an unloaded gun it is pretty hard to hit any bullseyes.

Listen very carefully - The WHA is *NOT* hunting. Hunting with a crossbow *IS* hunting. See the difference?

AGAIN - Only a class A idiot would draw a parallel between hunting with a crossbow and this WHA abomination.

Looks like you qualify..

"Deal with it..."


----------



## Free Range

> No surprise there are all considering the amount of bowhunter clubs voting.
> 
> The vote just re-affirmed their greed and selfishness.


Sounds like to me it re-affirmed that the x-bow lovers are not in the majority you would like us to think. It also sounds like it re-affirmed that the only reason it got as far as it did was because a SMALL vocal group backed by the mfg monies pushed it down the bowhunters throat. 



> That is pretty low, even for you..
> 
> We've all come together to stop Mr. Farbman (hopefully) and you then turn around and do this.
> 
> No shame or is your side that morally bankrupt?



Very funny coming from the side that is constantly calling us anti-hunters, PETA, raciest, and the like. I have all along said that the x-bow push will lead to others using the same BS lines of inclusion and unity. Now I point to the truth of it happening, and it offends you??? Well to bad, it is your side that is morally bankrupt and it hurts when it’s pointed out to you, doesn’t it? 

*Source,* right on man, I’m glad you can see this as well, in fact I’m pretty sure they see it to, but know what a corner it puts them in. This is the biggest problem I have with most of the pro x-bow guys. It’s the inconsistencies, x-bows in guns out, your way is raciest mine is not, you are saying a man is of no worth after his days of being able to pull a bow is over, but I'm not when he can no longer use a x-bow. You are against choice, we are all for it, (as long as it’s our way), and on , and on , and on. The funny thing is seeing their reaction when it’s pointed out to them, thanks guys for the comic relief. 

I wonder what happen to Ace, I know he is around I seen a post from him on another site, yesterday.


----------



## Free Range

To get back on subject, this threads title is In KY, I thought I would post this little bit of information. Maybe the study wasn’t as unbiased as we were lead to believe???? Makes a guy wonder now doesn’t it? 



> *Just before that a professor at Cornell University (interested in crossbows) compiled a study regarding the effeciency of the modern hunting crossbow.* Basically the study revealed the crossbow had the same ballistic performance as aq 60-70 pound compound bow, but the learning curve in shooting proficiently was equivalent to mastering a muzzle-loader (remember this was a long time before the popularity of in-lines).
> 
> Posted by: ottie Snyder | June 07, 2006 at 04:11 PM
> 
> here is the link
> 
> 
> http://mikehanback.blogs.com/bigbuck...ossbow_co.html


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> To get back on subject, this threads title is In KY, I thought I would post this little bit of information. Maybe the study wasn’t as unbiased as we were lead to believe???? Makes a guy wonder now doesn’t it?



LOL-this comes from a PBS member-the odious group that pushed the lie filled Marlow report-you know, the engineer who claimed that a novice with an xbow can outshoot a professional compound target archer or that 300 FPS xbows "shoot at almost twice the speed of most compounds"


----------



## thesource

willie said:


> AGAIN - Only a class A idiot would draw a parallel between hunting with a crossbow and this WHA abomination.
> 
> Looks like you qualify..
> 
> "Deal with it..."


Willie, Willie, Willie.

Your name calling and personal attacks only show how close this is hitting to home.

The WHA says _" 95% of the hunt is the same - only the shot is different" _.....

Now WHERE have we heard that before? 

Despite your obnoxious protestations, everyone can see through you like a window.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Willie, Willie, Willie.
> 
> Your name calling and personal attacks only show how close this is hitting to home.
> 
> The WHA says _" 95% of the hunt is the same - only the shot is different" _.....
> 
> Now WHERE have we heard that before?
> 
> Despite your obnoxious protestations, everyone can see through you like a window.



actually what we can see is as follows

Source and Free Range are using a Red herring in a pathetic attempt to claim that using one type of bow instead of another bow that has the same effectiveness is the same as supporting what is clearly a joke and would hurt hunting in the eyes of the public

secondly, Source realizes that calls upon him to justify his ego inspired archery apartheid cannot be continually avoided so he tries to tar Willie with this WHA nonsense in order to avoid answering questions that will destroy his sick obsession over what other hunters use to bowhunt with

remember source, the only people whining about crossbows are the greedmongers


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Some questions for the pro crossbow boys
Can a crossbow be shot accurately off of a solid rest?
Can a bow be shot accurately off of a solid rest?


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Some questions for the pro crossbow boys
> Can a crossbow be shot accurately off of a solid rest?
> Can a bow be shot accurately off of a solid rest?



explain to me the relevance of this

can a crossbow be shot again quickly after a miss?

are you against an accurate shot?

are you in favor of proficiency tests for archery season hunters


the hard part of bowhunting is range limitations


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> explain to me the relevance of this
> 
> can a crossbow be shot again quickly after a miss?
> 
> are you against an accurate shot?
> 
> are you in favor of proficiency tests for archery season hunters
> 
> 
> the hard part of bowhunting is range limitations


Why wont you answer my question?

How quick a crossbow can be shot after a miss has no relevace to my question, and if a shot is accurate you do not need a second shot. No not in favor of proficiency tests. Now you answer my question please


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Why wont you answer my question?
> 
> How quick a crossbow can be shot after a miss has no relevace to my question, and if a shot is accurate you do not need a second shot. No not in favor of proficiency tests. Now you answer my question please



are you really that dim? yes, under certain cases you can shoot a crossbow off a rest. its rather awkward in a hunting situation-parapalegics do it from their wheel chairs

You can use a rest to shoot a compound bow too but its even more awkward

is there a point to your question that has any relevance?

now answer mine-are you against accuracy?


----------



## Free Range

> LOL-this comes from a PBS member-the odious group that pushed the lie filled Marlow report-you know, the engineer who claimed that a novice with an xbow can outshoot a professional compound target archer or that 300 FPS xbows "shoot at almost twice the speed of most compounds"



Actually Jim it came from this guy, see link below. 


http://www.horizontalbowhunter.com/news/news.asp?ID=16


----------



## KY MUSTANG

I got another question while you are at it. Do you know anyone that can hold a bow at full draw all day?


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Actually Jim it came from this guy, see link below.
> 
> 
> http://www.horizontalbowhunter.com/news/news.asp?ID=16


I was referring to your post FR and your comments about the study being biased


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I got another question while you are at it. Do you know anyone that can hold a bow at full draw all day?



no-again do you have a point-I can hold an ohio legal compound at full draw on target longer than you can hold my crossbow on target.

I smell a SOCKPUPPET


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> are you really that dim? yes, under certain cases you can shoot a crossbow off a rest. its rather awkward in a hunting situation-parapalegics do it from their wheel chairs
> 
> You can use a rest to shoot a compound bow too but its even more awkward
> 
> is there a point to your question that has any relevance?
> 
> now answer mine-are you against accuracy?


 I would be really interested if you could explain how to shoot a bow off of a rest.
So there could not be a fixed rest in a hunting blind or a deer stand that a crossbow could be shot off of?

I am really interested in accuracy so please explain to me how I can use a rest on a bow 20' up a tree.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> the hard part of bowhunting is range limitations


Is that really all there is to it, Jim? 

Once again you demonstrate how little you know about bowhunting.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> no-again do you have a point-I can hold an ohio legal compound at full draw on target longer than you can hold my crossbow on target.
> 
> I smell a SOCKPUPPET


 I don't recall claiming I could hold your crossbow on target.
sock puppet , did I form an opion on you now? I just asked a question or 3 :wink:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Is that really all there is to it, Jim?
> 
> Once again you demonstrate how little you know about bowhunting.


I can't help it if you find making a 20 yard shot hard. I realize you have no real archery experience but its not hard to me. You see I practice shooting bows all the time. That's why I have shot 342/360 on the 30M target (12.2Cm ten ring which is smaller than the vital area on a deer) with a recurve, a 357/360 with a compound and a 354 with a crossbow. Hitting something that big on a deer at 20 yards is cake.

I am still waiting for any indendent verification you actually bowhunt source
I never said that is all there is too it but we all know what makes BH tough is range limitations not making the shot

if making the shot was all that counts, then my JOAD target archers would be superior bowhunters to you because they can shoot better than you can


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I don't recall claiming I could hold your crossbow on target.
> sock puppet , did I form an opion on you now? I just asked a question or 3 :wink:



I see you can't answer my questions. I think you are a sockpuppet supporting the anti xbow cult here.

I will ignore you from now on-you aren't relevant:thumbs_do


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> I see you can't answer my questions. I think you are a sockpuppet supporting the anti xbow cult here.
> 
> I will ignore you from now on-you aren't relevant:thumbs_do


 The only question I have not answered of your is do I have a point. You have not answered my question without putting a little twist into the equation. I think you see the point and that is why you want to bash me. You can not twist those around so you result to insults. The point of the questions.....They clearly illustrate the differences in the two weapons and the advantage you have while hunting with a crossbow.
I am still interested in you telling me how to use a rest on a bow 20' up a tree I am all about accuracy:wink:


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I can't help it if you find making a 20 yard shot hard. I realize you have no real archery experience but its not hard to me. You see I practice shooting bows all the time. That's why I have shot 342/360 on the 30M target (12.2Cm ten ring which is smaller than the vital area on a deer) with a recurve, a 357/360 with a compound and a 354 with a crossbow. Hitting something that big on a deer at 20 yards is cake.


YAWWWWWNNNN! No one cares except you. Your archery scores are meaningless tripe, insignificant in the larger and more important picture of bowhunting.



Jim C said:


> I never said that is all there is too it but we all know what makes BH tough is range limitations not making the shot


LOL - your ignorance on the many facets of bowhunting is astounding. There are multiple time each year I have deer close enough to shoot but cannot get a shot off.... those little things like drawing in the presence and balancing when to draw with how long you must hold it(Oh, yea - you wouldn't know because you need not do that with a crossbow. )

Getting close to deer during bowseason is relatively easy to anyone with decent hunting skills - closing the deal is the hard part with a bow, and that incorporates many variables, most of which are irrelevant to crossbows....or guns for that matter.


----------



## willie

KY MUSTANG said:


> I am still interested in you telling me how to use a rest on a bow 20' up a tree I am all about accuracy:wink:


*The Steady Ready by Knight and Hale..*

A shooting stick for a bow? A fully mobile, convenient way to keep your turkey shotgun at ready for a long period of time? *A unit that allows hunters to shoot off-hand nearly as steadily as with a rest? Yes, the Steady Ready is all of these and more. *

http://www.knightandhale.com/catalog.aspx?catID=KnightHaleFeaturedItems

Couple that with a Concept99 and you have a virtual vertical crossbow.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> YAWWWWWNNNN! No one cares except you. Your archery scores are meaningless tripe, insignificant in the larger and more important picture of bowhunting.
> 
> 
> 
> LOL - your ignorance on the many facets of bowhunting is astounding. There are multiple time each year I have deer close enough to shoot but cannot get a shot off.... those little things like drawing in the presence and balancing when to draw with how long you must hold it(Oh, yea - you wouldn't know because you need not do that with a crossbow. )
> 
> Getting close to deer during bowseason is relatively easy to anyone with decent hunting skills - closing the deal is the hard part with a bow, and that incorporates many variables, most of which are irrelevant to crossbows....or guns for that matter.


I think you are lying source and many people have noted that you make stuff up.

getting the big deer close is tougher than hitting a 6 inch circle at 20 yards.
your comments about crossbows are bred in ignorance again.

lifting and holding a crossbow-(i know you have NEVER done that in a hunting situation) vs drawing and holding a compound (all we have is your word-which means squat here) pretty similar source

when you have done both and can prove it I will listen to your prattling on


----------



## willie

"With the base of the steady arm positioned against the user’s stomach or waist, a bow hunter can draw a heavy poundage bow with ease, *then hold it for minutes at a time because all of the tension is absorbed by the steady arm*.The Steady Ready also makes it easier to hold the sight on the target for pinpoint *accuracy* even in the midst of a serious case of buck fever."


----------



## willie

"There are multiple time each year I have deer close enough to shoot but cannot get a shot off...."

Sounds like you are a P poor hunter...


.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

willie said:


> *The Steady Ready by Knight and Hale..*
> 
> A shooting stick for a bow? A fully mobile, convenient way to keep your turkey shotgun at ready for a long period of time? *A unit that allows hunters to shoot off-hand nearly as steadily as with a rest? Yes, the Steady Ready is all of these and more. *
> 
> http://www.knightandhale.com/catalog.aspx?catID=KnightHaleFeaturedItems
> 
> Couple that with a Concept99 and you have a virtual vertical crossbow.


Well thats not connected to the bow is it Willie. What I mean its not like laying it on a rock solid rest like a steady eddy is it?


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Willie,
do you know anybody that hold a bow at full draw all day?


----------



## willie

KY MUSTANG said:


> Well thats not connected to the bow is it Willie. What I mean its not like laying it on a rock solid rest like a steady eddy is it?


A rest is not "connected" to the crossbow either.

Did you miss - " *...hold it for minutes at a time because all of the tension is absorbed by the steady arm.*"??

AND...

*The Steady Ready also makes it easier to hold the sight on the target for pinpoint accuracy even in the midst of a serious case of buck fever."*

AND

*A unit that allows hunters to shoot off-hand nearly as steadily as with a rest? Yes, the Steady Ready is all of these and more.* 

"Nearly as steady as a rest" and has the mobility too.

I've killed 7 deer with a crossbow and none of the shots were rested.

In fact I have never heard of any crossbwers that use a rest while hunting.

Since most shots are close in (20 and under) a rest would hinder more than help.

Mobility to get a shot off is paramount in most huntings sitautions and I always stand up (so I can turn my body as needed) as soon as I see a deer that I want to shoot - that is with my crossbow and my compound/recurve when I could shoot them.

Tough to shoot to the right (I'm right handed) while sitting down - no matter what archery gear I am using.


----------



## willie

KY MUSTANG said:


> Willie,
> do you know anybody that hold a bow at full draw all day?


Not necessary.

I do know folks that can see a deer and make their draw while deer is still a ways out and wait until th deer hits their shooting lane.

Three hours or three minutes - what does it matter?


----------



## KY MUSTANG

willie said:


> A rest is not "connected" to the crossbow either.
> 
> Did you miss - " *...hold it for minutes at a time because all of the tension is absorbed by the steady arm.*"??
> 
> AND...
> 
> *The Steady Ready also makes it easier to hold the sight on the target for pinpoint accuracy even in the midst of a serious case of buck fever."*
> 
> AND
> 
> *A unit that allows hunters to shoot off-hand nearly as steadily as with a rest? Yes, the Steady Ready is all of these and more.*
> 
> "Nearly as steady as a rest" and has the mobility too.
> 
> I've killed 7 deer with a crossbow and none of the shots were rested.
> 
> In fact I have never heard of any crossbwers that use a rest while hunting.
> 
> Since most shots are close in (20 and under) a rest would hinder more than help.
> 
> Mobility to get a shot off is paramount in most hutnings sitautions and I always stand up (so I cna turne my body as needed) as soon as a I see a deer that I want to shoot - that is with my crossbow and my compound/recurve when I could shoot them.
> 
> Tough to shoot to the right (I'm right handed) while sitting down - no matter what archery gear I am using.


 So to have a rest with a bow you have to pack all that stuff with you. Why cant you just prop the bow on a rest attached to a stand like you would a gun or crossbow? 
and if you use the the steady ready it is still connected to your body and not something that can not move right?


----------



## willie

KY MUSTANG said:


> So to have a rest with a bow you have to pack all that stuff with you. Why cant you just prop the bow on a rest attached to a stand like you would a gun or crossbow?


I think that there could be a way that a vertical bow could be fixed on a stand rest with a ball joint socket extending from the stabilizer hole. It would sure cut down on mobility and limit the area covered, just like a stand rest would for a crossbow. 



> ...and if you use the the steady ready it is still connected to your body and not something that can not move right?


I have seen a similar device that can be used for crossbows called the "Steady Eddie" by TenPoint. With either the Steady ready or the Steady Eddie there is all kinds of mobilty in making a shot. A good STEADY shot.

*AGAIN* - Knight and Hale says - *'A unit that allows hunters to shoot off-hand nearly as steadily as with a rest? Yes, the Steady Ready is all of these and more."*


----------



## willie

BTW - the first black bear I killed I was shaking so bad that I had to put my bow arm against the tree I was in to keep steady.

I killed that bear with that shot.

Was that "rested"?


----------



## Jim C

willie said:


> A rest is not "connected" to the crossbow either.
> 
> Did you miss - " *...hold it for minutes at a time because all of the tension is absorbed by the steady arm.*"??
> 
> AND...
> 
> *The Steady Ready also makes it easier to hold the sight on the target for pinpoint accuracy even in the midst of a serious case of buck fever."*
> 
> AND
> 
> *A unit that allows hunters to shoot off-hand nearly as steadily as with a rest? Yes, the Steady Ready is all of these and more.*
> 
> "Nearly as steady as a rest" and has the mobility too.
> 
> I've killed 7 deer with a crossbow and none of the shots were rested.
> 
> In fact I have never heard of any crossbwers that use a rest while hunting.
> 
> Since most shots are close in (20 and under) a rest would hinder more than help.
> 
> Mobility to get a shot off is paramount in most huntings sitautions and I always stand up (so I can turn my body as needed) as soon as I see a deer that I want to shoot - that is with my crossbow and my compound/recurve when I could shoot them.
> 
> Tough to shoot to the right (I'm right handed) while sitting down - no matter what archery gear I am using.



I have killed a bit more than that with xbows and yes, I have never ever used a rest. I shot some seated, some standing but not rested-crossbow competitions require off hand shooting-no sitting, no rests-no boots or heavy supporting jackets so a 20 yard shot on a deer is easy for me. A rail on a stand would only get in the way and given that the angle of depression is higher for an xbow than a rifle, its pretty much worthless to me


----------



## thesource

OMG Willie, you are HILARIOUS!

You post _advertising copy _ that claims it is similar to a rest and expect us to believe it is the same as a rest? ROFLMAO at how ridiculous you can be.

Why would you straight up LIE about this:

_In fact I have never heard of any crossbwers that use a rest while hunting._

When in this very forum every time the issue comes up we talk about Twogun resting his crossbow on several occasions? 

We know why - it is counter to your propaganda. Yuck.

Educate yourself Willie. Go to huntingnet and check out the thread where MANY crossbows tak about hunting off rests of all types....including your pal DJH who states:
_"
I have been using the Knee Pod for about a year and a half now and to be quite honest, I won’t use anything else to stabilize my crossbow or my camera. It is pretty remarkable when a hunter can sit for a four hour stay in a treestand with his (or her) crossbow at the ready and do it comfortably. "_

Go read it so we can at least put the rested crossbow issue to bed and you can no longer mislead that "you've never heard" of rested crossbows.

Double yuck - revolting.


----------



## thesource

willie said:


> BTW - the first black bear I killed I was shaking so bad that I had to put my bow arm against the tree I was in to keep steady.
> 
> I killed that bear with that shot.
> 
> Was that "rested"?


Give it up - you look foolish trying to claim that a tree or a rip off steady eddie is the same as a bippod or padded shooting rail.

You aren't fooling anyone....why do you continue with an obvious charade? It gives me a sickening feeling to read such unabashed misrepresentation.


----------



## Jim C

why are you against accuracy Source?


----------



## KY MUSTANG

So from our discussion here can we all agree that a crossbow can be used with a solid rest as I asked from the beginning. Its not a matter of accuracy its just the fact that it can . We dont need to argue about it, bash, etc.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

I think we can also agree that a bow can not be held at full or partial draw for an extended amount of time ( IE ) if a bowhunter tried to hold for too long this would effect his accuracy and as Jim brought up this is important, it just would not be ethical to do this practice in a hunting sinerio right Jim. 

A crossbow once cocked at full draw can remain that way all day during the hunt in no way effcting the muscles in a hunters arms used for aiming at his quarry. When you think of a bow hunter having to use muscles to hold the bow back and then different muscles to aim you definately can see a greater degree of difficulty. We can even discuss the exact muscles used if you guys want just to show how much more is going on in a bow hunters body compared to a crossbow hunter especially if the crossbow hunter is using a rest.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I think we can also agree that a bow can not be held at full or partial draw for an extended amount of time ( IE ) if a bowhunter tried to hold for too long this would effect his accuracy and as Jim brought up this is important, it just would not be ethical to do this practice in a hunting sinerio right Jim.
> 
> A crossbow once cocked at full draw can remain that way all day during the hunt in no way effcting the muscles in a hunters arms used for aiming at his quarry. When you think of a bow hunter having to use muscles to hold the bow back and then different muscles to aim you definately can see a greater degree of difficulty. We can even discuss the exact muscles used if you guys want just to show how much more is going on in a bow hunters body compared to a crossbow hunter especially if the crossbow hunter is using a rest.


scenario SP

I am curious what your point is (I know what you are attempting-I just tire of the circular nonsense that is so common from the antis on this board)


----------



## Free Range

> I am curious what your point is (I know what you are attempting-I just tire of the circular nonsense that is so common from the antis on this board)



      

Now that there is funny, us, ciruclar????


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> scenario SP
> 
> I am curious what your point is (I know what you are attempting-I just tire of the circular nonsense that is so common from the antis on this board)


 Circular nonsense , attempting? We are having a discussion on the advantages a crossbow has over a bow. We have came up with two so far that I hope we can all agree on.
Now since we have confirmed a crossbow can be cocked at full draw all day long lets talk about how that could be an advantage just by itself in a hunting scenario. BTW thanks for catching my spelling mistake, I suppose you know the definition of the word.Can we agree that it would be less motion required to just aim the crossbow vs drawing the bow and then aiming?


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Circular nonsense , attempting? We are having a discussion on the advantages a crossbow has over a bow. We have came up with two so far that I hope we can all agree on.
> Now since we have confirmed a crossbow can be cocked at full draw all day long lets talk about how that could be an advantage just by itself in a hunting scenario. BTW thanks for catching my spelling mistake, I suppose you know the definition of the word.Can we agree that it would be less motion required to just aim the crossbow vs drawing the bow and then aiming?



you are beating a dead horse-there is no objective data available that can prove a crossbow has a net advantage in the taking of deer over compound bows. Maybe you are a newbie or maybe you are a sockpuppet but this nonsense has been beaten to death on this forum. I disagree that less motion is needed to aim a crossbow given the frontal mass. IF a deer is going to see you draw a compound bow he is going to see you raise and aim a crossbow. 

the point you are unsuccessfully trying to make is this

1) crossbows have advantages over compound bows
2) those advantages make it UNFAIR to compound archers to have to compete with crossbow archers
3) therefore crossbows should not be allowed in compound bow season

however, this is specious reasoning due to several facts

1) compounds have certain advantages over crossbows including the fact that compounds are quieter, more easy to manuever and much more easy to reshoot than a crossbow. They also are less affected by severe weather.

2) compound accuracy is as good as crossbow accuracy among competent hunters-at above average to expert levels, a compound is MORE accurate than a crossbow

3) there is NO EVIDENCE that clearly proves that crossbows are more efficient at harvesting deer than compounds or that xbow hunters have a higher rate of predicted success than compounds

4) the difference and advantages of a compound compared to a trad bow are patent and undeniable yet those two bows are in the same season

what I tire of is that you all try to based your reasons on phony claims of "unfairness" when in reality what really motivates the antis is either 1) greed-they don't want anymore people in their season and banning xbows will keep some out and 2) they have self esteem problems that emanate from their self image as a bowhunter that they think suffers if someone confuses them with a crossbow archer


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Ok Jim I see you need to start at the beginning and explain to me why you prefer a crossbow , shoot it etc. All you want to do is bash I see:thumbs_do


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Ok Jim I see you need to start at the beginning and explain to me why you prefer a crossbow , shoot it etc. All you want to do is bash I see:thumbs_do



wrong -why don't you tell us what YOUR Position is (its obvious to me but others might be confused)

I bash anti xbow trolls' positions

KY's profile:

Additional Information Group Memberships 
N/A 


suspicious? yes I am


----------



## willie

> OMG Willie, you are HILARIOUS!
> 
> You post advertising copy that claims it is similar to a rest and expect us to believe it is the same as a rest? ROFLMAO at how ridiculous you can be.


Knight and Hale are well known as archers and bowhunters. Are you saying that this Steady Ready doesn’t work? Have you tried using it?




> Why would you straight up LIE about this:
> 
> In fact I have never heard of any crossbowers that use a rest while hunting.
> 
> When in this very forum every time the issue comes up we talk about Twogun resting his crossbow on several occasions?
> 
> We know why - it is counter to your propaganda. Yuck.



Two gun said he propped it up on his KNEES while hunting from the ground. We are discussing all kinds of mechanicla rests in treestands. Please try and stay up with us.



> Educate yourself Willie. Go to huntingnet and check out the thread where MANY crossbows tak about hunting off rests of all types....


Please show me where I am a member of HuntingNet and would thus know what was posted there.



> ….including your pal DJH who states:
> 
> "I have been using the Knee Pod for about a year and a half now and to be quite honest, I won’t use anything else to stabilize my crossbow or my camera. It is pretty remarkable when a hunter can sit for a four hour stay in a treestand with his (or her) crossbow at the ready and do it comfortably. "


Knee pod? Isn’t that a monopod like a Steady Ready? How can the monopod that DJH uses be a rest, but the Knight and Hale Steady Ready isn’t?

Aren't you being a tad hypocritical by labeling one a rest and not another because of the type of archery equipment that they are supporting?



> Go read it so we can at least put the rested crossbow issue to bed and you can no longer mislead that "you've never heard" of rested crossbows.


I’m going by the crossbowers I know and the crossbowers on Excalibur. Go read it yourself.



> Double yuck - revolting.


The only thing “revolting” is your lack of m knowledge of bowhunting.

"Yuck"? Do you always speak in such a childish manner?


*The source part duex..*



> Give it up - you look foolish trying to claim that a tree or a rip off steady eddie is the same as a bippod or padded shooting rail.


But, wait a minute. You said that DJH used a steady eddie type of knee monopod as example of a crossbower using a rest. Now you say that it isn’t the same as a rest because a compound bow is used? You can't have it both ways. Do you have any inkling of what you are discussing?



> You aren't fooling anyone....why do you continue with an obvious charade? It gives me a sickening feeling to read such unabashed misrepresentation.


LOL.. the only charade around here is you trying to pass off as something that you’re not.

BTW – You never did answer how many of those 24 bucks you took with a “knock ‘em dead on the spot” slug gun.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

I ask a few questions and say a crossbow has a few advantages over a bow and suddenly I become a troll ........interesting.
You accuse me of posting circular nonsense. What I find so intersting is you asked me if there was something wrong with accuracy I assume you were refering to crossbows being more accurate, then you post a compound is more accurate................ huh ?????

1) compounds have certain advantages over crossbows including the fact that compounds are quieter, more easy to manuever and much more easy to reshoot than a crossbow. They also are less affected by severe weather.
a bow can be drawn completely silent...Below you post accuracy, lets be honest why would you need a second shot, how often will it happen, what type of weather... I hope you would not crossbow or bow hunt in rain if that is what you mean

2) compound accuracy is as good as crossbow accuracy among competent hunters-at above average to expert levels, a compound is MORE accurate than a crossbow
define a competent hunter, does this refer to one that practices and knows his weapon well?If a compound is more accurate why do you choose a crossbow...... a while ago you seemed to be concerned with accuracy being a good thing

3) there is NO EVIDENCE that clearly proves that crossbows are more efficient at harvesting deer than compounds or that xbow hunters have a higher rate of predicted success than compounds how many deer were taken by crossbow last year in ohio, how many were taken by bow?

4) the difference and advantages of a compound compared to a trad bow are patent and undeniable yet those two bows are in the same seasonI see no difference here , all these are drawn and fired by the shooter, not cocked like a crossbow, does a compound type crossbow have and advantage over a traditional type crossbow?

If you will just think positive and give it some time (not bash me) we will get this fact finding mission worked out


----------



## thesource

Sigh ..... MORE wil-LIE spin. OK, let's get to it 




willie said:


> Knight and Hale are well known as archers and bowhunters. Are you saying that this Steady Ready doesn’t work? Have you tried using it?.


Of course I haven't tried it....why would I? Bowhunting is bowhunting, and little do-nothing gadgets come and go. This device can't do what you say - it does not hold up the bow, it holds up the bow arm (claims to hold up the bow arm). Anyone who bowhunts (or HAS bowhunted) understands the difference between this device and supporting your weapon via a rest. 

What's really sad is that I know you understand the difference....yet you try to misrepresent to further your agenda. Very unseemly.






willie said:


> Two gun said he propped it up on his KNEES while hunting from the ground. We are discussing all kinds of mechanicla rests in treestands. Please try and stay up with us..



That's a REST, dum dum. Oh yea, you KNEW that too. Try resting a compound on your knee. 



willie said:


> Please show me where I am a member of HuntingNet and would thus know what was posted there.
> 
> 
> willie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beside the point. You HAVE seen others discuss shooting a crossbow from a rest here, on Excalibur, and elsewhere.
> 
> To suggest otherwise shows a definite lack of character.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> willie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Knee pod? Isn’t that a monopod like a Steady Ready? How can the monopod that DJH uses be a rest, but the Knight and Hale Steady Ready isn’t?
> Aren't you being a tad hypocritical by labeling one a rest and not another because of the type of archery equipment that they are supporting?
> 
> 
> 
> I strongly urge anyone interested in the TRUTH to visit the KneePod website and determine for themselves how to characterize this rest. http://www.therealdecoy.com/hunterskneepod.html
> Since the hunter using the kneepod has a rifle, I think its fairly safe to assume this is not a Steady Ready....lol. That's clearly NOT archery equipment he is supporting there, bub.
> 
> More spin from Wil-LIE
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## spec

Wonder if anyone in the crossbow world is going to file suit claiming plagarism concerning the letter by the WHA(as posted by freerange on page 11)?


----------



## willie

Poor old the source trying to figure out what is and what isn’t a “rest.”

He could do a lot better if his bias wasn’t so against crossbows.


According to him TwoGun used a “rest” when he propped his crossbow up on his knee.

However, Willie DIDN’T use a “rest” when he put his upper arm against a tree to calm his shaking while shooting his first black bear. Mr. Black Bear looking down on me as I type says differently.


Then he says that DJH used a “Knee Pod” and that was a “rest.”











But then he says that because a Steady Ready supported a compound shooter’s bow arm (which supports the bow - duh ) it is not a “rest”. He even goes so far to bad mouth the Steady Ready even though he has never tried it when he says



> “Of course I haven't tried it....why would I?


But he can say it doesn't hold up the bowhunter's arm and the bow - a rest.

However, Knight and Hale says - *" ...hold it for minutes at a time because all of the tension is absorbed by the steady arm."*

*AND...*

*The Steady Ready also makes it easier to hold the sight on the target for pinpoint accuracy even in the midst of a serious case of buck fever."*

*AND*

*A unit that allows hunters to shoot off-hand nearly as steadily as with a rest? Yes, the Steady Ready is all of these and more.*

Now, who should we believe? Knight and Hale or thesource (who admittedly never tried one)?










You see the source is that way. He changes terminology to fit his agenda.

Sorry, thesource. Try again..

But, lets do try and keep on the subject of mechanical rests and not knees.


----------



## thesource

OMG - you are funny!

Swim, willile, swim! You are being flushed downstream in a wash of your own bullcrap.

Reasonable people know:

1) Knees are a rest from the sitting position. (I learned that while training with rifles in the military, wil-lie... you gonna argue with them?) By the way, when is the last time you rested a bow at full draw on your knee and released your arrow? Duh.

2) The knee pod is obviously a rest for rifles and crossbows.

3) Your claim that a tree is rest is absurd - it did not support the weight of your weapon, did it?

4) Your claim that the steady ready is a rest is a joke on multiple levels. You ignore the fact that a bow is held at draw with both hands, for example, and your gimmick does nothing to help with that......

5) Your continued use of commercial advertisement copy and claims is an admittance that you have got nothing....

Acid test for your character, Wil-lie....do you really believe a steady ready functions as a true rest?

Do you believe a knee pod functions as a true rest?

Inquiring minds want to know - your credibility is on the line....


----------



## Jim C

why does source hate accuracy? should we tell the non hunting public that source's pride is more important than a clean kill? should we tell them that source looks down on people who use the best bow based on their practice-or lack of practice?


----------



## thesource

Jim - it is a wonder you graduated high school let alone Cornell with the things you come up with.

Of course I am not against accuracy - but if that were to be the ONLY metric, we will have nothing but benchrest rifles to hunt with. That's not what you are advocating, is it? 

Bowhunting is all about balancing your accuracy with opportunity, setting your personal limits - effective range. THAT is one of the reasons why crossbows offer such a tactical advantange....increased effective range due to the fundamental differences in how you operate them.

My bowhunting "pride" comes from the fact that I have those limitations, understand those limitations, yet still manage to get a good buck year after year in spite of those limitations. Your radical agenda shortcircuits those limitations - that does not make bowhunting better, only easier.....its not the same thing.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Jim - it is a wonder you graduated high school let alone Cornell with the things you come up with.
> 
> Of course I am not against accuracy - but if that were to be the ONLY metric, we will have nothing but benchrest rifles to hunt with. That's not what you are advocating, is it?
> 
> Bowhunting is all about balancing your accuracy with opportunity, setting your personal limits - effective range. THAT is one of the reasons why crossbows offer such a tactical advantange....increased effective range due to the fundamental differences in how you operate them.
> 
> My bowhunting "pride" comes from the fact that I have those limitations, understand those limitations, yet still manage to get a good buck year after year in spite of those limitations. Your radical agenda shortcircuits those limitations - that does not make bowhunting better, only easier.....its not the same thing.


still dealing with your self esteem issues I see. I would be happy to compare educational resumes with you anyday but given the thrashing you have taken over a comparison of our respective archery credentials, I don't think your fragile ego could handle another carpetbombing:wink: 

maybe one day you will figure out what radical means-even though you apparently are stuck on the Poop and DUng talking points you continue to look silly


----------



## KY MUSTANG

hey jim what about our discussion we were having?


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> hey jim what about our discussion we were having?



there was no conversation-you were being obtuse -read the threads, I asked you your position on xbows and I haven't heard an answer yet

I see your phony profile is akin to some of the stuff Marvin used to have

I smell a sockpuppet and a troll and while you denied being a troll, your moronic lie filled profile proves I was right


----------



## willie

Let's cut to the chase thesource.

Anything that you can REST or support a hunting tool ON or AGAINST or provide SUPPORT FOR holding that bow, gun, crossbow to get better accuracy is a REST.

Yes, the Knee pod qualifies and does the Steady Ready (vertical bow) and Steady Eddie (crossbow), the tree that we are in, a limb of the tree we are in and shooting rail if a stand has one.

Anyone that says otherwise is not playing fair because they are blinded by their hatred of a particular archery hunting tool..

*AGAIN* - I have never seen anyone on Excalibur say they use a shooting rail. None of the crossbowers in my area use a rest. I and Jim have never used a rest. My stands do not even have them. They would get in the way.

Funny that someone who has never hunted with a crossbow can tell us how we do it.....


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> there was no conversation-you were being obtuse -read the threads, I asked you your position on xbows and I haven't heard an answer yet
> 
> I see your phony profile is akin to some of the stuff Marvin used to have
> 
> I smell a sockpuppet and a troll and while you denied being a troll, your moronic lie filled profile proves I was right


Its a shame you have to go low enough to call me names and such. I am for real not Marvin in disquise or a sockpuppet as you say. I have no problem with there being a crossbow season, but they are not the same weapon and like wise the seasons should reflect so. 
You have made 4 points that lean towards a crossbow being at a disadvantage to a bow, is this what you believe? By what you have stated I think people could view a crossbow as being insufficient to harvest game with, is that what you mean.


----------



## thesource

willie said:


> Let's cut to the chase thesource.
> 
> Anything that you can REST or support a hunting tool ON or AGAINST or provide SUPPORT FOR holding that bow, gun, crossbow to get better accuracy is a REST.
> 
> Yes, the Knee pod qualifies and does the Steady Ready (vertical bow) and Steady Eddie (crossbow), the tree that we are in, a limb of the tree we are in and shooting rail if a stand has one.
> 
> Anyone that says otherwise is not playing fair because they are blinded by their hatred of a particular archery hunting tool..
> 
> *AGAIN* - I have never seen anyone on Excalibur say they use a shooting rail. None of the crossbowers in my area use a rest. I and Jim have never used a rest. My stands do not even have them. They would get in the way.
> 
> Funny that someone who has never hunted with a crossbow can tell us how we do it.....


You're right....

Let's cut to the chase.

EVERYONE knows what a rest is, everyone has used one to sight in a rifle (or a crossbow), NOONE has used one to sight in a bow.

Your arguement is intellectually dishonest and agenda driven.

The fact that you can use a rest (in its traditional sense) with a crossbow is just ONE MORE GUNLIKE ATTRIBUTE of a crossbow.

You pretend otherwise because it hurts your defense of your precious crossbow, but it is another glaring example of the fundamental differences between bow and crossbow.

You are not fooling anyone, only exposing your partisan nature and weakening your credibility.

Thanks for playing.


----------



## willie

thesource said:


> You're right....
> 
> Let's cut to the chase.
> 
> EVERYONE knows what a rest is, everyone has used one to sight in a rifle (or a crossbow), NOONE has used one to sight in a bow.


You don't know that do you? You've watched EVERYONE sight in their bows??



> Your arguement is intellectually dishonest and agenda driven.


PCTKB...



> The fact that you can use a rest (in its traditional sense) with a crossbow is just ONE MORE GUNLIKE ATTRIBUTE of a crossbow


.

You're moving the goal posts and now saying "in a traditional sense".

The Steady Ready and my leaning my arm against the tree doesn't count in a "traditional sense" according to thesource. Why not? Because they don't meet his agenda. Both steady the bow and provides for an accurate shot, but they are not "traditional sense" rests. Too funny.



> You pretend otherwise because it hurts your defense of your precious crossbow, but it is another glaring example of the fundamental differences between bow and crossbow


.

No pretending at all. You are the one in denial that a Steady Ready is also a rest that can be used by a vertical bowhunter in any "SENSE" that you want it to be. Do many people use? Probably not taht many, but it is there to use if a vertical bowhunter chooses to. Just like that Knee Pod for crossbows. DJH says he uses one, but that is the only one I've even heard that uses one. I didn't even know about him until you posted that quote.

I'll bet DJH does not use it exclusively.



> You are not fooling anyone, only exposing your partisan nature and weakening your credibility.


PCTKB


----------



## thesource

Keep crying, Willie - dig that hole deeper! LOL

We see through you like a window. 



willie said:


> I'll bet DJH does not use it exclusively.


Have another helping of crow, you are wrong again - here's some more from your pal DJH:

_"When you see Daniel James Hendricks hunting with his crossbow, you will see a Knee Pod hooked to his belt or in his backpack, I can guarantee it!"_

LOL ....


----------



## doctariAFC

:moviecorn :moviecorn :moviecorn


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Its a shame you have to go low enough to call me names and such. I am for real not Marvin in disquise or a sockpuppet as you say. I have no problem with there being a crossbow season, but they are not the same weapon and like wise the seasons should reflect so.
> You have made 4 points that lean towards a crossbow being at a disadvantage to a bow, is this what you believe? By what you have stated I think people could view a crossbow as being insufficient to harvest game with, is that what you mean.



I know you are not marvin-marvin's smarter:wink: 

the fact is-compounds are far different from longbows and in almost every possible area-advantaged yet they have the same exact season. compounds and crossbows basically net out the same 

its intellectually dishonest to demand separating crossbows out from compound season but not demanding that compounds be removed from trad bow season

there is Absolutely no rational reason to exclude one type of bow from archery season. the herd doesn't need it. the only people who clamor for such a division are people who have self esteem or ego problems or are driven by greed and don't want any more people hunting in "their" season

what category do you fall into KY?


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> I know you are not marvin-marvin's smarter:wink:
> 
> the fact is-compounds are far different from longbows and in almost every possible area-advantaged yet they have the same exact season. compounds and crossbows basically net out the same
> 
> its intellectually dishonest to demand separating crossbows out from compound season but not demanding that compounds be removed from trad bow season
> 
> there is Absolutely no rational reason to exclude one type of bow from archery season. the herd doesn't need it. the only people who clamor for such a division are people who have self esteem or ego problems or are driven by greed and don't want any more people hunting in "their" season
> 
> what category do you fall into KY?


 Well .... I will not resort to a personal attack on your knowledge and could care less of what you think of mine. 

There is very little difference in compounds and longbows its like comparing a 30-30 to a 30-06. Now comparing a crossbow to either of the 2 is like comparing a handgun to long gun of the same caliber, with the crossbow being the long gun. Hence the accuracy is controlled by the hand with the hand gun not a stock like a crossbow has. :laugh: 

So you can see a difference.... the reasons are very noticable if you will just examine the two weapons.

I have neither the greed or ego problem you mention, I just see the crossbow has an advantage and feel it needs its own season , like comparing muzzeloader to a modern firearm. Its really simple just try to have an open mind for a second. Whats your feeling on the questions you asked me earlier on the other page. We need to get our advantages and disadvantages straight before we move on with the discussion as you are doing. We can tally them up later and we will see the advantages between the 2
:focus:


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Well .... I will not resort to a personal attack on your knowledge and could care less of what you think of mine.
> 
> There is very little difference in compounds and longbows its like comparing a 30-30 to a 30-06. Now comparing a crossbow to either of the 2 is like comparing a handgun to long gun of the same caliber, with the crossbow being the long gun. Hence the accuracy is controlled by the hand with the hand gun not a stock like a crossbow has. :laugh:
> 
> So you can see a difference.... the reasons are very noticable if you will just examine the two weapons.
> 
> I have neither the greed or ego problem you mention, I just see the crossbow has an advantage and feel it needs its own season , like comparing muzzeloader to a modern firearm. Its really simple just try to have an open mind for a second. Whats your feeling on the questions you asked me earlier on the other page. We need to get our advantages and disadvantages straight before we move on with the discussion as you are doing. We can tally them up later and we will see the advantages between the 2
> :focus:



thanks for proving how little you know-you are dismissed-no one who understands all three bows would claim that a compound is closer in performance to a longbow than a crossbow or that the learning curve to obtain hunting level accuracy is closer between a compound and a trad bow versus a crossbow and a compound

You still are dodging my question and your answer proves you are going to prevaricate and evade


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> thanks for proving how little you know-you are dismissed-no one who understands all three bows would claim that a compound is closer in performance to a longbow than a crossbow or that the learning curve to obtain hunting level accuracy is closer between a compound and a trad bow versus a crossbow and a compound
> 
> You still are dodging my question and your answer proves you are going to prevaricate and evade


:focus: 
For your information I have shot all 3 and I know the learning curve is the same with a compound and long bow. They institute the same principals, the flight path may vary, but the same priciples with or without sites as I assume that is the point you lean towards. The crossbow has a very small learning curve..... point and pull the trigger, once it is zeroed anyone can hit accurately with one. The 2 bows are not like that are they....? Thanks for proving another advantage the crossbow has, glad we see eye to eye on this one. Btw there is not a stock on the compound or longbow, they are both held by the hands only ...... another point I think we can agree on correct.

I did not dodge your question, I said I feel a crossbow should have its own season since it has several advantages over a longbow or compound. If they were together it would be like using a rifle during handgun season. I trust you can relate to the advantages in this scenerio:wink:


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> :focus:
> For your information I have shot all 3 and I know the learning curve is the same with a compound and long bow. .
> 
> :



This has to be one of the most moronic comments I have ever seen on this board.

I can teach an average adult to shoot a 275+ on an NFAA indoor 300 round in less than a week if they work hard with a modern compound, peep sight, pin sight and release

I have seen long time longbow archers NEVER shoot such a score. My top JOAD girl-ranked #1 in the USA last year for 16 and under who shoots with a sight, clicker and beiter stabilizer rig and is two time young adult NFAA champion shot this score


1 ASH, MELISSA KY, USA 274 14 283 18 557 
She trains 500 -1000 arrows a week for the last 3 years.

she would have lost to hundreds of compound archers-even barebow compound archers beat her. If I had a compound kid who couldn't beat that score in 6 months of shooting I would start really worrying about their talent or my coaching. 
You have proven how totally ignorant you are by claiming that a compound's learning curve is the same as a longbow.

as George Tekmitchov (former US Archery Team member-US world field team 04 as well and Hoyt's master designer) once noted-give him a compound that is right handed and within a couple inches of his correct draw length and he can hang with 95% of the top recurve archers in the world.

at NFAA indoor-dozens upon dozens of compound guys shot 600 scores-NOT ONE recurve archer did that in the last two years and the recurve field included

Butch Johnson, Rick McKinney, (both four time olympians) John Magera (Athens 04) Jason McKittrick (Pan Am Gold medalist-99), Vic Wunderle (Olympic silver 00) Doug Pritchett (04 world field team) among others.

the longbow guys weren't even anywhere near the olympic recurves.

BTW several dozen compound archers beat the crossbow guys-I was the only one there who wasn't in the top ten in the USA

MALE TRADITIONAL SCORES (that includes OLYMPIC style bows with no sights or stabilizers-a bit like a trad hunting bow with better rests and limbs) from NFAA nationals-06

Top score- 561

http://www.nfaa-archery.org/tournaments/IndoorNationals/resultsSimple.cfm

half the field did not break 500 (250 a round)


Compound Bowhunter FS (not the unlimted target rigs, not the professionals)

http://www.nfaa-archery.org/tournaments/IndoorNationals/resultsSimple.cfm

20 600 scores. now this was not the top of the drawer compound shooters. If you add in the Pros and the Am Male FSU you will see dozens upon dozens of 600 shooters


----------



## KidKy24

Jim C said:


> This has to be one of the most moronic comments I have ever seen on this board.
> 
> I can teach an average adult to shoot a 275+ on an NFAA indoor 300 round in less than a week if they work hard
> 
> I have seen long time longbow archers NEVER shoot such a score.
> 
> You have proven how totally ignorant you are by claiming that a compound's learning curve is the same as a longbow.
> 
> as George Tekmitchov (former US Archery Team member-US world field team 04 as well and Hoyt's master designer) once noted-give him a compound that is right handed and within a couple inches of his correct draw length and he can hang with 95% of the top recurve archers in the world.
> 
> at NFAA indoor-dozens upon dozens of compound guys shot 600 scores-NOT ONE recurve archer did that in the last two years and the recurve field included
> 
> Butch Johnson, Rick McKinney, (both four time olympians) John Magera (Athens 04) Jason McKittrick (Pan Am Gold medalist-99), Vic Wunderle (Olympic silver 00) Doug Pritchett (04 world field team) among others.
> 
> the longbow guys weren't even anywhere near the olympic recurves.
> 
> BTW several dozen compound archers beat the crossbow guys-I was the only one there who wasn't in the top ten in the USA
> 
> MALE TRADITIONAL SCORES (that includes OLYMPIC style bows) from NFAA nationals-06
> 
> Top score- 581
> 
> http://www.nfaa-archery.org/tournaments/IndoorNationals/resultsSimple.cfm
> 
> half the field did not break 500 (250 a round)
> 
> 
> Compound Bowhunter FS (not the unlimted target rigs, not the professionals)
> 
> http://www.nfaa-archery.org/tournaments/IndoorNationals/resultsSimple.cfm
> 
> 20 600 scores. now this was not the top of the drawer compound shooters. If you add in the Pros and the Am Male FSU you will see dozens upon dozens of 600 shooters



just to let u and willie know, i appreciate what u r doing for x-bowers. i know that these cats can't argue with u guys. they THINK they can and thats why this post is so long. wasn't old enuff to remember, but this HAS to be just like when compounds were introduced, i bet some of same fools are the ones doing the most carping and *****ing 


been lurking too long, just had to say thanks to jimc and willie :cocktail:


----------



## willie

> KyMustang - "..... I know the learning curve is the same with a compound and long bow."


*You've got to be kidding!! Man, you just flushed any credibilty that you have ever had right down the toilet..*


.


----------



## Jim C

willie said:


> *You've got to be kidding!! Man, you just flushed any credibilty that you have ever had right down the toilet..*
> 
> 
> .



he was so eager to try to justify keeping crossbows out of archery season while allowing compounds in trad bow season that he really stepped in it. As I said, we are dealing with a troll who probably has ZERO bowhunting experience and clearly is completely clueless about this issue.


----------



## willie

Jim C said:


> he was so eager to try to justify keeping crossbows out of archery season while allowing compounds in trad bow season that he really stepped in it. As I said, we are dealing with a troll who probably has ZERO bowhunting experience and clearly is completely clueless about this issue.


He is in good company taking sides with thesource.

Birds of feather..

Methinks he had better come back with another Sock Puppet name.

This one is all used up..


.


----------



## willie

I've read a dozen crossbow hunting articles (at least) by Dan and never once did he mention a Knee Pod.

Maybe he is doing a little "promoting"..


----------



## Free Range

> Posted by Willie on another thread here on AT
> 
> I agree...
> 
> This thing is a farce and to even insinuate to the non-hunting public this what we do when we hunt is a LIE..


Kind of like trying to claim you are bowhunting when you have a x-bow in your hand???


----------



## thesource

willie said:


> I've read a dozen crossbow hunting articles (at least) by Dan and never once did he mention a Knee Pod.
> 
> Maybe he is doing a little "promoting"..


LOL - 


J-O-K-E. You are humiliating yourself, here. Just admit you are wrong and move on. It is obvious to everyone that crossbows can and is shot off of rests just like the rifles they were designed for.....why? Because of the gunlike qualities of the crossbow....the fundamental differences between real bows and crossbows.

If ignorance is bliss, you are pretending to be one happy guy!


----------



## ban_t

thesource said:


> Although I am having some difficulty understanding your semi-literate ramblings, I think you are trying to suggest something that isn't true.
> 
> I agree - Let's band together and not fight with one another. Crossbow advocates need to keep their greedy hands off off bowseason and try to find a season of their own. If they do that, I'm certain they will have the support of real bowhunters, too.



Source 
So you are the insult idiot so I tried too keep it nice you just have to goto insults right out of the Gates. I do not understand you at all. Insulting people because you can will not sell your piont just cause more divsion. 
I am glad that xbows are up and coming. 
I will also help in New York along with many Freinds I have there too promote Xbows Since they also beleive the same way many of us do. Just So I can get my greeedy fingers in your season  and make it All About me. 
Have a Nice Day Not a Source Not a true Person too promote hunting 
Just another New York Liberal looking too hinder others too help himself. 
You are a really strange person.


----------



## thesource

ban_t said:


> Source
> So you are the insult idiot so I tried too keep it nice you just have to goto insults right out of the Gates. I do not understand you at all. Insulting people because you can will not sell your piont just cause more divsion.
> I am glad that xbows are up and coming.
> I will also help in New York along with many Freinds I have there too promote Xbows Since they also beleive the same way many of us do. Just So I can get my greeedy fingers in your season  and make it All About me.
> Have a Nice Day Not a Source Not a true Person too promote hunting
> Just another New York Liberal looking too hinder others too help himself.
> You are a really strange person.


LOL....

calling me an idiot is a personal attack and is against the rules. Mind your manners!

I would think you would worry about IN, which does not allow crossbows in early archery season, before you gave a care about NY.

NY liberal - tha's funny. Did you know that only NYC, Albany, Syracuse, Rochester, and Ithaca (where JimC went to school) vote democratic in NY? The rest of the state is very rural and very republican....we just cannot compete with all the downstate lefties....(and Cornell, lol)


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Kind of like trying to claim you are bowhunting when you have a x-bow in your hand???



because greedy egotists say its not doesnt mean anything. why don't you worry about your own bowhunting experience and not worry about denigrating others. I realize that putting other forms of bowhunting down may stroke your self esteem but its rather stupid. Last I checked the IBO has a crossbow division-they must consider crossbows part of bowhunting and I guarantee you the IBO has alot more people who participate in their activities and belong to the IBO or IBO clubs than Poop and Dung or the Prevaricating Bloviation Society


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Last I checked the IBO has a crossbow division-they must consider crossbows part of bowhunting



WRONG, until proven otherwise.

IBO is not a bowhunting org - they are a target shooting org.

SHOW ME that IBO has an official postion that crossbows should be included in bowhunting seasons or *SHUT UP!*

Your make believe fairyland bullcrap is wearing on my nerves.

You have FAILED to produce a SINGLE organization with an official position that xbow be included into bowseasons.

Your claim that ATA did is obviously flawed - I use it as a sig line to remind you daily how far you have strayed from the true and honest path.

PUT UP or SHUT UP, Jim....SHOW US an archery org that OFFICIALLY supports xbow in bowseason....or keep it closed, since you obviously know very little about actual BOWhunting.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> WRONG, until proven otherwise.
> 
> IBO is not a bowhunting org - they are a target shooting org.
> 
> SHOW ME that IBO has an official postion that crossbows should be included in bowhunting seasons or *SHUT UP!*
> 
> Your make believe fairyland bullcrap is wearing on my nerves.
> 
> You have FAILED to produce a SINGLE organization with an official position that xbow be included into bowseasons.
> 
> Your claim that ATA did is obviously flawed - I use it as a sig line to remind you daily how far you have strayed from the true and honest path.
> 
> PUT UP or SHUT UP, Jim....SHOW US an archery org that OFFICIALLY supports xbow in bowseason....or keep it closed, since you obviously know very little about actual BOWhunting.


1) source-you have neither the standing nor the credibility to tell anyone to shut up-especially me when it comes to a crossbow discussion

2) I don't care if I wear on your nerves-you are a hateful little egotist who has the nerve to call thousands of men far better than you "lazy" "cheaters" or lie that their trophies really don't count

3) your mental problems-ie your self esteem issues are obvious to everyone on this board and we tire of your evasive bs and your false sense of superiority based on the lie that you bow hunt


----------



## Love Bowhunting

Jim C said:


> 1) source-you have neither the standing nor the credibility to tell anyone to shut up-especially me when it comes to a crossbow discussion
> 
> 2) I don't care if I wear on your nerves-you are a hateful little egotist who has the nerve to call thousands of men far better than you "lazy" "cheaters" or lie that their trophies really don't count
> 
> 3) your mental problems-ie your self esteem issues are obvious to everyone on this board and we tire of your evasive bs and your false sense of superiority based on the lie that you bow hunt



Thesource isn't worthy of scrubbing JimC's toilet let alone debating him.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> 1) source-you have neither the standing nor the credibility to tell anyone to shut up-especially me when it comes to a crossbow discussion


Here - I'll do it again... Put up or SHUT UP. 
Need another one? Then get the official position to support your claims!



Jim C said:


> 3) your mental problems-ie your self esteem issues are obvious to everyone on this board and we tire of your evasive bs and your false sense of superiority based on the lie that you bow hunt


Whatever, Jim. I bowhunt and you already know it. I'm beginning to wonder if YOU have ever hunted with a real bow.


Stop foaming at the mouth and find the evidence to support your often repeated claims.

If IBO supports xbow in bowseason, there should be an official statement that says so....

I'm waiting - hop to it!


----------



## thesource

Love Bowhunting said:


> Thesource isn't worthy of scrubbing JimC's toilet let alone debating him.


My Turn ..... Sock Puppet. I expect its Dougk returning to be banned for a 7th time....Is that a record?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Here - I'll do it again... Put up or SHUT UP.
> Need another one? Then get the official position to support your claims!
> 
> 
> 
> Whatever, Jim. I bowhunt and you already know it. I'm beginning to wonder if YOU have ever hunted with a real bow.
> 
> 
> Stop foaming at the mouth and find the evidence to support your often repeated claims.
> 
> If IBO supports xbow in bowseason, there should be an official statement that says so....
> 
> I'm waiting - hop to it!


I don't believe you bowhunt-You have yet to find a single person who actually can vouch for you. You have lied so many times I don't trust anything you say. IBO has lots of luddites in its membership but they admited that since xbows were now coming into archery seasons, they would be accommodated.

you are rather naive about political realities


----------



## Jim C

Love Bowhunting said:


> Thesource isn't worthy of scrubbing JimC's toilet let alone debating him.



No need to bash poor source's janitorial skills-i am sure he would be tremendous at that job


----------



## willie

IBO... International *BOWHUNTING* Organization..

I was there when it was founded and it was founded by *BOWHUNTERS..*

Jim,

It is becoming more and more apperant that thesource is ready to go off the deep end with this anti-crossbow obsession. It has to be a sickness...

Maybe he needs us to cut him a little slack before he does something desperate.


----------



## willie

thesource,

How many of those 24 bucks were dropped on the spot by your slug gun?

You said that you killed some deer , but never got to the point of saying it was with a bow of any sort.

Details, we want details...


----------



## Jim C

willie said:


> IBO... International *BOWHUNTING* Organization..
> 
> I was there when it was founded and it was founded by *BOWHUNTERS..*
> 
> Jim,
> 
> It is becoming more and more apperant that thesource is ready to go off the deep end with this anti-crossbow obsession. It has to be a sickness...
> 
> Maybe he needs us to cut him a little slack before he does something desperate.



good point-we wouldn't want the NY POST headline to read

PETA MEMBER GOES POSTAL IN BOWSHOP SELLING CROSSBOWS


----------



## Jim C

willie said:


> IBO... International *BOWHUNTING* Organization..
> 
> I was there when it was founded and it was founded by *BOWHUNTERS..*
> 
> Jim,
> 
> It is becoming more and more apperant that thesource is ready to go off the deep end with this anti-crossbow obsession. It has to be a sickness...
> 
> Maybe he needs us to cut him a little slack before he does something desperate.



The founding club (the first or one of the first) was TRIANGLE LAKES Bowhunters in Middletown Ohio. Some of the early IBO worlds were held there-"BAD EYE Bren igar won the first or second worlds when the favorite (Bubba -was it powers) rest broke. the entire purpose of the IBO was to create REALISTIC hunting practice on LIFELIKE targets.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

*Jim and Willie*

It is very interesting how you are trying to spin the discussion to another topic.The comparison is crossbows to bows, not compound to longbow:wink: .
All you guys have proven is you can insult and try to spin over to another subject . 
Now read this real slow ........tell us all, how a crossbow is more difficult to master than a bow,


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> It is very interesting how you are trying to spin the discussion to another topic.The comparison is crossbows to bows, not compound to longbow:wink: .
> All you guys have proven is you can insult and try to spin over to another subject .
> Now read this real slow ........tell us all, how a crossbow is more difficult to master than a bow,


this is coming from the non archer who claimed that the learning curve is the same between a compound and a trad bow 

you are confused-as usual. Its easier to gain hunting level proficiency (shooting accuracy) with a crossbow. once that proficiency has been achieved, the compound archer will surpass the crossbow archer in both range and accuracy as proven in the IBO and the NFAA. 

so what we have -novices-under a few months of practice-the crossbow will be "more accurate" people are beginners for less than one tenth of their hunting lifespan if they hunt for only ten years

for those who have been shooting a while, the accuracy is essentially equivalent

for those who have an avid target or 3D background, they achieve greater accuracy with the compound 

your pathetic attempts to exclude crossbows is based upon stupid assumptions and outright lies. You -like many of the unknowing-confuse initial ease of use with increased efficiency


----------



## Jim C

I have an idea-people who clearly put lies in their profile ought to be banned

where did KY trot off to?


----------



## willie

KY MUSTANG said:


> It is very interesting how you are trying to spin the discussion to another topic.The comparison is crossbows to bows, not compound to longbow:wink: .
> All you guys have proven is you can insult and try to spin over to another subject .
> Now read this real slow ........tell us all, how a crossbow is more difficult to master than a bow,


No.. you justify your statement of.."I know the learning curve is the same with a compound and long bow." 

*ANYONE * making that statement knows zilch about archery.

Where did the source dig you up at?


----------



## thesource

Here is what I requested:


thesource said:


> SHOW ME that IBO has an official postion that crossbows should be included in bowhunting seasons or *SHUT UP!*


Here is what you two windbags have given me:



Jim C said:


> IBO has lots of luddites in its membership but they admited that since xbows were now coming into archery seasons, they would be accommodated.





willie said:


> IBO... International *BOWHUNTING* Organization. I was there when it was founded and it was founded by *BOWHUNTERS..*





Jim C said:


> The founding club (the first or one of the first) was TRIANGLE LAKES Bowhunters in Middletown Ohio. Some of the early IBO worlds were held there-"BAD EYE Bren igar won the first or second worlds when the favorite (Bubba -was it powers) rest broke. the entire purpose of the IBO was to create REALISTIC hunting practice on LIFELIKE targets.


Is the self appointed crossbow brain trust having difficulty understanding the task?

*GET AN OFFICIAL POSTION STATEMENT THAT SHOWS IBO SUPPORTS CROSSBOWS IN BOWSEASONS.*

While your personal attacks and slanderous comments are amusing, all it shows is that you cannot back up your bullcrap.

In fact, get an official position from any mainstream bowhunting or archery org that shows support for it.

(No willie, ACF and UCBK don't count. That's like asking ACLU about gay marriage....interesting similarities, there, but we'll save that for another day)

Come on boys. The world has seen your bluff and bluster - back it up, or shut it up.


----------



## Jim C

It appears that source is getting a bit desperate. My wife is a Charter life member of IBO so I have a bit of understanding of what they are up to. They realized that more and more xbows are joining archery season and since the primary raison d'etre of the IBO was to provide realistic bowhunting practice for hunters, xbows were invited in. That they don't lobby for more xbow inclusion is a political reality so that the sources of greed and selfishness don't get their panties in a knot.


I wonder where KY Sock ran off to. His reasoning is even weaker. He claims xbows should be a in different season than compounds based on his ignorant claim that xbows have NET advantages over compounds yet he sidesteps the fact that no one with a brain disagrees with the proposition that compound bows have REAL and easily demonstrated (like IBO and target scores) advantages over trad bows


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> realized that more and more xbows are joining archery season and since the primary raison d'etre of the IBO was to provide realistic bowhunting practice for hunters, xbows were invited in. That they don't lobby for more xbow inclusion is a political reality so that the sources of greed and selfishness don't get their panties in a knot.


Shooting crossbows at foam dummies in a separate class from compounds hardly equates to belonging in bowseason.

You cannot publish an official position that IBO supports it. You cannot publish official position of your archery orgs that would support xbow in bowseason either. Why should they - its none of their business - archery and bowhunting orgs are separate entities with separate goals and objectives.

Meanwhile, I can list the official position of the REAL bowhunting orgs, all of which either publicly declare their oppposition to crossbows in bowseason or their refusal to advocate xbow in bowseason.

Bowhunters and their orgs realize that crossbows don't belong..... only a handful of zealots, radicals, and bowhunter wannabees say otherwise.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Shooting crossbows at foam dummies in a separate class from compounds hardly equates to belonging in bowseason.
> 
> You cannot publish an official position that IBO supports it. You cannot publish official position of your archery orgs that would support xbow in bowseason either. Why should they - its none of their business - archery and bowhunting orgs are separate entities with separate goals and objectives.
> 
> Meanwhile, I can list the official position of the REAL bowhunting orgs, all of which either publicly declare their oppposition to crossbows in bowseason or their refusal to advocate xbow in bowseason.
> 
> Bowhunters and their orgs realize that crossbows don't belong..... only a handful of zealots, radicals, and bowhunter wannabees say otherwise.



your fixation is amazing and your lies are astounding. REAL bowhunting groups-well how do we define that? A group that created a (at least at one time) realistic hunting practice course for bowhunters isn't a "real bowhunting" group but one that sits around and strokes egos while calling other bowhunters all sorts of vile names is?

so what makes a group a bowhunting group-an organization that puts on shoots etc and contributes thousands of dollars to defend bowhunting with the money they raise in BOWHUNTER DEFENSE FUND shoots or a small group that records the size of dead deer.

You are again wrong Source and your hateful envy causes you to lie like a rug about organizations that (gasp) promote shooting skills for BOWHUNTERS

here source-this sure sounds like a TARGET ARCHER ISSUE from the IBO

http://www.ibo.net/editorial/


----------



## KY MUSTANG

willie said:


> No.. you justify your statement of.."I know the learning curve is the same with a compound and long bow."
> 
> *ANYONE * making that statement knows zilch about archery.
> 
> Where did the source dig you up at?


 Well ... Willie first let me add a little to some incorrect things you posted a few pages back. 
Ronnie Wells won the lks presidental election by 11 votes ... even though members of the UCBK were trying to drag his name through every mud hole in the state of Ky . Their postition was he did not stand behind the majority of the lks during a compromise meeting directly relating to crossbow expansion and this claim was untrue .Tell us how many of the UCBK members are from ky anyway Willie, then tell us how many were from Canada and other places.:wink: Tell us how the UCBK 'S crossbow expansion resoulution came out... If I remember correctly the vote was 130 against 11 for. By what you posted earlier you believe that bow clubs in the state is the reasoning for the resolution coming up that short. Tell everyone how the LKS VOTING TAKES PLACE:wink:
I think you and Jim are confusing instinctive shooting with learning curve. That can be applied to either weapon. A long bow and a compound are shot the same way the way their energy is stored is different. You still must have an anchor point and follow through the same every time to be accurate.

Wow .......see there !!!!....this is turning out positive another advantage a crossbow has. You always have the same anchor point because the string is locked in the same place , of course you need to make sure it is centered.... but this is accomplished by marking the string and inspecting well before the shot.
We are finding several advantages so far .... dont let the discussion end here:bump2: .
And a little more about your long bow compound comparison (even though our discussion is comparing crossbows to the two) Crossbows come in recurve style and compound which do you guys like best?And what reason

And ...Jim ...I can look over the name calling does not bother me a bit, you are just putting extra miles on your fingers :zip: We are talking about a hunting season also I am not aware of any state laws keeping crossbows out of target practice:bounce: Interesting "spin" though :focus:


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> your fixation is amazing and your lies are astounding. REAL bowhunting groups-well how do we define that? A group that created a (at least at one time) realistic hunting practice course for bowhunters isn't a "real bowhunting" group but one that sits around and strokes egos while calling other bowhunters all sorts of vile names is?
> 
> so what makes a group a bowhunting group-an organization that puts on shoots etc and contributes thousands of dollars to defend bowhunting with the money they raise in BOWHUNTER DEFENSE FUND shoots or a small group that records the size of dead deer.
> 
> You are again wrong Source and your hateful envy causes you to lie like a rug about organizations that (gasp) promote shooting skills for BOWHUNTERS
> 
> here source-this sure sounds like a TARGET ARCHER ISSUE from the IBO
> 
> http://www.ibo.net/editorial/



Jim - SHOW ME the official position statement from IBO that says they advocate or support crossbows in bowseasons.

SHOW ME or shut up.

You keep claiming to have all this high level support (ATA, IBO, etc) yet I have already PROVEN ATA was a lie and you have FAILED miserably to find a shred of evidence to support your claims.

Your credibility is zero - SHOW ME.


----------



## Jim C

Is KY going to defend her idiotic claim that a trad learning curve is the same as a compound? I have already proven that the obtainable accuracy with a compound is far far higher than "traditional bows" 

I guess KY realized she really stepped in it with that claim and if her entire reason for saying xbows shouldn't hunt in the same season as compound bows even though She cannot prove that a crossbow has a NET ADVANTAGE for all hunters over compounds, she had to make up such a stupid claim to justify keeping compounds with trad bows

1) ease of learning- Crossbows then compounds then trad bows

2) accuracy for beginners Crossbows, then compounds then trad bows

3) accuracy for experienced archers-crossbows and compounds even-then trad bows 


4) accuracy for accomplished archers Compounds, then crossbows then trad bows

the trad bow (which includes non sighted olympic style target bows) winning scores in major target events are usually so low that they wouldn't place in the top 98% of compound scores-indeed, about the only time a trad bow will beat a compound sighted release shooter is if the latter quits the competition

5) target range Compounds, then crossbows, then trad bows

6) hunting range-compounds, then crossbows then trad bows


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Jim - SHOW ME the official position statement from IBO that says they advocate or support crossbows in bowseasons.
> 
> SHOW ME or shut up.
> 
> You keep claiming to have all this high level support (ATA, IBO, etc) yet I have already PROVEN ATA was a lie and you have FAILED miserably to find a shred of evidence to support your claims.
> 
> Your credibility is zero - SHOW ME.


1) you haven't the credentials to tell anyone to shut up and your fixation on this issue is pathetic

2) I have already explained the IBO position-they have made their organization open to crossbow archers just as they have to other archers because their main goal is to further bowhunter accuracy. The ATA nonsense of yours was already put to bed and your hysterics prove your mental issues are bubbling over

3) you have ignored my question as to what is a bowhunting orgainzation. IN your warped view of reality-if an organization sponsors target events designed to increase bowhunter accuracy and if they contribute thousands of dollars to defend bowhunting and if they post editorials on bowhunting issues they aren't a bowhunting organization. Just what does the NABC do to promote bowhunting or better yet, help and train bowhunters?

you proved you are really clueless when you claimed that the IBO is not a bowhunting organization. do you think if bowhunting did not exist the IBO ever would have come about? Ducks Unlimited sponsors numerous sporting clays tournaments to raise money for duck wetland programs-I guess using your moronic "thinking" that makes them a "target organization" not a duck hunting group


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim this discussion is not about comparing compounds to traditional bows ( a while ago it was long bow, there is a recurve bow also) it is about crossbows having several advantages over a compound and traditional bows in a hunting situation. So far we have came up with several reasons

#1 Not having to draw a crossbow. Targets will not run off a deer will

# 2 A crossbow can be directly propped onto a solid rest and a bow can not

#3 A crossbow has a fixed anchor point , a bows anchor point can change due to the hunters form, etc

#4 A crossbow hunter does not hold any amount of the stored energy required to make the bow shoot , only the weight of the crossbow. A bow hunter holds the stored energy and the weight of the bow.

#5 A crossbow hunter does not have to worry about the strict form required to shoot a bow accurately

#6 A crossbow has a stock like a rifle whick greatly increases the ability to hold steady while hunting. Like comparing a hand gun to a rifle of the same caliber.

#7 Cold weather which is common during deer season will effect a crossbow less than a bow. The greater the surface area of an object the more it will expand and contract during temperature changes.


Please stop calling me names Jim its not helping your argument and is making you look like a child. I will not stoop to your level, even though you continue to do so.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Jim this discussion is not about comparing compounds to traditional bows ( a while ago it was long bow, there is a recurve bow also) it is about crossbows having several advantages over a compound and traditional bows in a hunting situation. So far we have came up with several reasons


the advantages you bray about talis do not result in a NET advantage over compound bows and you cannot find any clear evidence that xbow harvest rates are higher than compounds. 

whining about advantages that have no relevance in the field is stupid. Its like saying one brand of target bow has advantages over another but when we look at tournament wins and see that the "disadvantaged bows" win as much then we can conclude that the advantages are not really relevant.

your blather about trad bows is idiotic and if advantages demand a separate season then you are intellectually dishonest to claim that trads and compounds ought to be together since we can easily prove that compound bows are NET ADVANTAGED over trad bows




KY MUSTANG said:


> #1 Not having to draw a crossbow. Targets will not run off a deer will


you still have to move and aim a crossbow. if this advantage really mattered you ought to be able to show it with harvest statistics. In this day of blinds and high treestands, your attempt to show a statistical advantage fails



KY MUSTANG said:


> # 2 A crossbow can be directly propped onto a solid rest and a bow can not
> 
> #3 A crossbow has a fixed anchor point , a bows anchor point can change due to the hunters form, etc
> 
> #4 A crossbow hunter does not hold any amount of the stored energy required to make the bow shoot , only the weight of the crossbow. A bow hunter holds the stored energy and the weight of the bow.


more bs-are you against accuracy? with all these advantages, why do compound archers outscore crossbow archers in both indoor and 3D tournaments? Bowhunters don't hold all the stored weight on a compound bow-a compound bow is a machine that does most of the work of holding the weight.

are you against accuracy? btw-



KY MUSTANG said:


> #5 A crossbow hunter does not have to worry about the strict form required to shoot a bow accurately
> 
> #6 A crossbow has a stock like a rifle whick greatly increases the ability to hold steady while hunting. Like comparing a hand gun to a rifle of the same caliber.


more stupidity. rifle target scores are much higher than pistol target scores if they both shoot on the same target. yet compound target scores are higher than crossbow scores. so much for your moronic rifle-pistol comparison

you don't need strict form to shoot a deer at 20 yards. I am a master coach and have taught hundreds of kids form and I have observed thousands of bowhunters. few hunters use proper form and the compound release eliminates most of the form requirements to shoot a compound well enough to consistently kill deer



KY MUSTANG said:


> #7 Cold weather which is common during deer season will effect a crossbow less than a bow. The greater the surface area of an object the more it will expand and contract during temperature changes.


actually cold weather affects archers, not the bow. driving rain is harder on crossbows. prove your claim about a compound being more affected than a crossbow -you obviously know not of what your prattle




KY MUSTANG said:


> Please stop calling me names Jim its not helping your argument and is making you look like a child. I will not stoop to your level, even though you continue to do so.


I think you are clueless about archery in general and crossbows in particular and your idiotic claim that a trad bow's learning curve is the same as a compound has condemned you to being seen by anyone knowledgeable in this area as unlearned. affecting a faux facade for a profile and calling yourself a pro crossbow staffer is a lie and thus I conclude you are essentially dishonest in every area concerning this subject


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim, again we are comparing crossbows avantages over bows during hunting season.... not olympic style competition. 

Tell us ohio's last 3 years crossbow vs bow success rates and harvest #'s. That will give you the proof you seek. It is available and you know it is.

Traditional bows and compounds are allowed by law to hunt together, my or your opion on that has nothing to do with this discussion. I suggest you contact every states dnr to discuss your problem with them. I can do nothing about it ......sorry. 
I have told you I have no problem with accuraccy...... but we don't allow single shot rifles in muzzeloader season do we. 

The only thing I can conclude is you have been obsessed with my profile from the beginning no matter what it said. If you want to deny the facts thats fine , but please again stop the name calling and personal attacks. I did not do that to you.
I understand you may be upset because I rained on your parade. 

And anything on this planet expands with heat and shrinks with cold temperature. Water is the only thing that expands when frozen. Also the greater the area the more a substance moves with changes. And you are right weather does effect the hunter more, ............ another advantage to using a crossbow, when a hunter gets cold it is harder to pull a bow back, but a crossbow makes no differece its all ready back at the moment of truth.
Boy Jim you are good at finding crossbow advantages over bows.:wink:
And again its unethical to bow or crossbow hunt in the rain imo


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Jim, again we are comparing crossbows avantages over bows during hunting season.... not olympic style competition.
> 
> Tell us ohio's last 3 years crossbow vs bow success rates and harvest #'s. That will give you the proof you seek. It is available and you know it is.
> 
> Traditional bows and compounds are allowed by law to hunt together, my or your opion on that has nothing to do with this discussion. I suggest you contact every states dnr to discuss your problem with them. I can do nothing about it ......sorry.
> I have told you I have no problem with accuraccy...... but we don't allow single shot rifles in muzzeloader season do we.
> 
> The only thing I can conclude is you have been obsessed with my profile from the beginning no matter what it said. If you want to deny the facts thats fine , but please again stop the name calling and personal attacks. I did not do that to you.
> I understand you may be upset because I rained on your parade.
> 
> And anything on this planet expands with heat and shrinks with cold temperature. Water is the only thing that expands when frozen. Also the greater the area the more a substance moves with changes. And you are right weather does effect the hunter more, ............ another advantage to using a crossbow, when a hunter gets cold it is harder to pull a bow back, but a crossbow makes no differece its all ready back at the moment of truth.
> Boy Jim you are good at finding crossbow advantages over bows.:wink:
> And again its unethical to bow or crossbow hunt in the rain imo



1) do you admit or deny that a compound has major advantages over trad bows

2) do you admit or deny that advantages on paper really don't matter unless those advantages translate into harvest success rates

3) do you admit or deny that if your reason for excluding crossbows from compound season is based on theoretical advantages then its hypocritical for you to claim that trad bows and compound bows ought to share the same season?

4) do you admit or deny that the differences between the ease of use and effectiveness of compounds vs trads is GREATER than the alleged differences of ease of use and effectiveness between crossbows and compounds

5) do you admit or deny that measuring the potential accuracy and range of a bow has to be done on a target environment because there is no way to properly measure it in the variable conditions of hunting

As to ohio-there are no exact figures (guess what, there are no exact figures as to the amount of deer in any state-rather its based on a scientific guestimation) BUT the head of the DNR has continually stated that longbows (which includes compounds and longbows) is the same as crossbows


----------



## JDMiller

KY MUSTANG said:


> Well ... Willie first let me add a little to some incorrect things you posted a few pages back.
> Ronnie Wells won the lks presidental election by 11 votes ... even though members of the UCBK were trying to drag his name through every mud hole in the state of Ky . Their postition was he did not stand behind the majority of the lks during a compromise meeting directly relating to crossbow expansion and this claim was untrue .Tell us how many of the UCBK members are from ky anyway Willie, then tell us how many were from Canada and other places.:wink: Tell us how the UCBK 'S crossbow expansion resoulution came out... If I remember correctly the vote was 130 against 11 for. By what you posted earlier you believe that bow clubs in the state is the reasoning for the resolution coming up that short. Tell everyone how the LKS VOTING TAKES PLACE:



Ky Mustang........... I'll answer some of your questions you brought up.

1. The UCBK supported the other candidate. As president of the UCBK I never posted nor stated anything against Ronnie. The problem that a few have with Ronnie is the LKS Board of Directors voted to support the decision of the KDF&WR Commission.....which was voted on for full expansion. This was what should have been supported but instead the LKS/Ronnie was a public focal point of the compromise .....which there was no crossbow supporters in attendance. The 2nd district LKS president even drafted a letter prior to the compromise , to be signed by Ronnie.....which was never done and at no time did he make any vocal show of support . These actions or lack of action was a lot of the reason for resentment. I have nothing personal against Ronnie and the guys that made their point known......well their big boys...its their decision and like everything else of this process....their pretty fustrated.

2. UCBK Membership....... For 2006 we have on the list 30 members. Only 5 of those are non-residents and none from Canada. 25 members are needed for LKS affiliation and all 25 of the UCBK's are Kentucky residents like you and me and pay Kentucky taxes. Our membership will only get larger. 

As far as Bow clubs....... there were 6 new clubs out of the 3rd district alone ......5 were archery oriented and this provided 12 more votes in addition to one of the districts with the most clubs anyway. All in all.... I view this is good .......it shows sportsman involvement which is needed more that what the continued division ......like fighting other hunters ....such as whats going on in this thread. 

3. LKS Resolution votes ....... the votes are done by show of hands. The crossbow resolution failed but to state it failed by 11 -130 is mis-leading. The moderator asked for show of support...at that point it was easily decided it failed . They never asked for a show of those opposed....and there is nothing making you vote on any resolution.....otherwords the delegates of any paticiular club could and did remain neutral on certain issues....I personally saw many that did not vote either way. I dont know their reasons from abstaining from certain votes but it did happen. I will also add that it was stated by the LKS BOD there were 146 delegates present . Your figures add up to 141.

Myself and my daughter were delegates for the UCBK........ we met a lot of good people on both sides of the fence on this issue. If you were there ....or as it seems your making out that way.....I wished you would have introduced yourself. You might be suprised that were not as evil as some make this issue out to be. However ....I dont recall seeing you there.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> 1) do you admit or deny that a compound has major advantages over trad bowsThey are different, a compound has letoff, traditional does not. Most trad are longer than compounds, most trad do not have sites and are shot by instinct, but in hunting this is up to the guy that owns the bow. Anchor points, form , etc are still in control of the shooter. Where they are not with crossbows which is what we are comparing them to anyway..
> 
> 2) do you admit or deny that advantages on paper really don't matter unless those advantages translate into harvest success rates
> thats irrelevant to our comparison I know no one that hunts paper and as I said we do not allow single shot rifles into muzzeloader season, so if a dnr is fair to muzzleloader hunters they should be fair to bowhunters that are at a definate disadvantage to crossbow hunters.There is not any good reason (someone that is not handicapped) can not learn to shoot a bow,
> 
> 3) do you admit or deny that if your reason for excluding crossbows from compound season is based on theoretical advantages then its hypocritical for you to claim that trad bows and compound bows ought to share the same season? Crossbows do not resemble either and have several advantages that completely out number the differences between trad and compound.
> 
> 4) do you admit or deny that the differences between the ease of use and effectiveness of compounds vs trads is GREATER than the alleged differences of ease of use and effectiveness between crossbows and compounds
> No its not crossbows are way easier than either
> 
> 5) do you admit or deny that measuring the potential accuracy and range of a bow has to be done on a target environment because there is no way to properly measure it in the variable conditions of hunting
> Every weapon should be practiced with , its completely unethical to hunt with said weapon otherwise, .....still ....hunting is different ......never saw a bullseye snort and run off, see you draw..... etc
> 
> As to ohio-there are no exact figures (guess what, there are no exact figures as to the amount of deer in any state-rather its based on a scientific guestimation) BUT the head of the DNR has continually stated that longbows (which includes compounds and longbows) is the same as crossbows


I was not refering to deer population ......kill#'s by each weapon , and they do keep this info, and the crossbow has a higher success rate than bows.... you know this , same thing in Georgia if I remember correctly
MORE SPIN :focus:


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I was not refering to deer population ......kill#'s by each weapon , and they do keep this info, and the crossbow has a higher success rate than bows.... you know this , same thing in Georgia if I remember correctly
> MORE SPIN :focus:



In other words YOU CANNOT PROVE your implication that crossbows have a hunting advantage over compounds. without that proof, your facade of an argument swirls down the toilet

its obvious that you are afraid to tell us why you really are against crossbows so you make up BS pretextual excuses

after your whopper about trad bows vs compound bows you really have no shred of credibility. the fact is-it takes a long time for someone to learn how to shoot a trad bow-aiming without sights etc. it takes a long time to train to comfortably hold 45-70 pounds while most men can easily draw and hold a 50-60 pound compound without ANY training

then we have releases-give a decent olympic recurve archer (1100) a release and he will keep up with most world class recurve archers. it makes things so much easier

of as to Ohio

http://hunting.about.com/od/arch/l/aa020716a.htm

More current information obtained from the Ohio Department of Wildlife (ODOW) for the year of 2001 says this: 

"Of the 155,000 archery participants, 70,000 used a crossbow, 55,000 use a vertical bow and 30,000 used both. Of seniors who apply for and receive a free license, 4,000 used a crossbow, 1,000 used a vertical bow and 1,000 used both. Success rates for 2001 were identical for crossbow hunters and vertical bow hunters at 14%."


dispute it if you want-

I love your evasions answering my questions. you avoid answering whether the ease of use gap between crossbows and compounds is smaller than that between trads and compounds-you have to avoid that because it slaps your silly argument away-NO ONE WHO UNDERSTANDS ARCHERY would deny that the gap between the crossbow and compound is MINISCULE compared to the time it takes to gain ethical hunting accuracy with a trad bow compared to a release fired compound bow

this claim of KY sockpuppet<<<Crossbows do not resemble either and have several advantages that completely out number the differences between trad and compound.
>>

is baseless bovine droppings. those advantages have never been proven in the field and are grasped by the excluders because they have no evidence that xbows are more efficient in harvesting deer at a statistically meaningful level


----------



## thesource

Jim -

1) do you admit or deny that a crossbow has major advantages over vertical bows?

2) do you admit or deny that determining actual harvest success rates requires careful consideration of many variables, including hours in the field, that no state currently tracks?

3) do you admit or deny that because compounds are advantaged over trad bows is not a sufficient reason by itself to allow an even more advantaged weapon into bowseason?

4) do you admit or deny that there are fundamental differences in operation between crossbows and compounds?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Jim -
> 
> 1) do you admit or deny that a crossbow has major advantages over vertical bows?
> 
> 2) do you admit or deny that determining actual harvest success rates requires careful consideration of many variables, including hours in the field, that no state currently tracks?
> 
> 3) do you admit or deny that because compounds are advantaged over trad bows is not a sufficient reason by itself to allow an even more advantaged weapon into bowseason?
> 
> 4) do you admit or deny that there are fundamental differences in operation between crossbows and compounds?



bottom line source-compounds have certain advantages that are obvious-crossbows have certain advantages that are obvious but when you add them up and count them, the two bows net out statistically the same

of course there are fundamental differences in operation between compounds and crossbows-there are fundamental differences between shooting a peep sighted compound with a release over a trad bow and those differences are BIGGER than the ones between a crossbow and a compound bow

Can you tell us why these differences require different seasons based on objective reasons?


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> more bs-are you against accuracy? with all these advantages, why do compound archers outscore crossbow archers in both indoor and 3D tournaments? Bowhunters don't hold all the stored weight on a compound bow-a compound bow is a machine that does most of the work of holding the weight.
> 
> are you against accuracy?


DUH ..... stupidest arguement ever.

Of course no one is against accuracy, but you must compare apples to apples.

The issue, of course, is that using a rested crossbow improves accuracy to the point that it increases the effective range of the user. In other words, in the bowhunting world of hand supported, hand drawn, and hand held - its kinda like cheating.  

Here's the second part of stupid - if accuracy is the only metric, we should all be using rifles. Double duh.


----------



## thesource

JDMiller said:


> 2. UCBK Membership....... For 2006 we have on the list 30 members. Only 5 of those are non-residents and none from Canada. 25 members are needed for LKS affiliation and all 25 of the UCBK's are Kentucky residents like you and me and pay Kentucky taxes. Our membership will only get larger.


Please tell us how many members you had in 2005 when UCBK was formed that enabled you to join LKS, get 2 votes, and cancel out the KBA, and what number of those were non-residents of KY.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> DUH ..... stupidest arguement ever.
> 
> Of course no one is against accuracy, but you must compare apples to apples.
> 
> The issue, of course, is that using a rested crossbow improves accuracy to the point that it increases the effective range of the user. In other words, in the bowhunting world of hand supported, hand drawn, and hand held - its kinda like cheating.
> 
> Here's the second part of stupid - if accuracy is the only metric, we should all be using rifles. Double duh.



careful with that stupid argument source given the crap you have spewed-its obvious you think people who don't practice much should be limited to wounding game because that is what happens in reality under your view of what bows are proper

in the bigots world you call it cheating-in the world of intelligent people we call it ethical to use a bow you can master more easily since there is no competition involved-its a fgn recreational activity and you have already conceded you are not harmed and the herd is not harmed by what type of bow someone else hunts with

all we are dealing with is your mental issues and self esteem problems now

bringing guns into the topic-now that is REALLY STUPID

bowhunting is not hurt objectively if your stilted definition of hand held (my crossbow is always hand held) or hand drawn (we had to get rid of hand released about 30 years ago didn't we) as the defining elements of bowhunting is eliminated

nothing is harmed by saying bowhunting involves hunting with archery gear and only a true moron denies that crossbows are archery gear


----------



## JDMiller

thesource said:


> Please tell us how many members you had in 2005 when UCBK was formed that enabled you to join LKS, get 2 votes, and cancel out the KBA, and what number of those were non-residents of KY.




thesource....... for 2005 it was around 28 members .....and it was about a split on residents & non-residents. The LKS....does not require a member to be a resident......so your point is kinda moot. There were a lot of new archery clubs....as I stated ....they only had 25 members listed. Should we question their members.....in my opinion it does'nt matter.

In 2005 there were around 130 delegates for clubs. Each club is allowed 2 delegates....the UCBK's two votes did not cancel anything out for the KBA. Fact being there are numberous archery clubs with delegate voting powers.....I really dont know what your getting at or even talking about. You might want to do a little more research before you comment.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> careful with that stupid argument source given the crap you have spewed-its obvious you think people who don't practice much should be limited to wounding game because that is what happens in reality under your view of what bows are proper


ANY hunter should limit the range he is willing to shoot at a deer to a distance he is sure he can make the shot at. One would expect that those who don't prtactice much would decrease their maximum range accordingly....that should be true whether the hunter in question has a bow, a crossbow, or a cannon.

It is totally dishonest to pretend that xbows would result in lower wounding losses than bows. In fact, we know that you have lost more deer with your crossbow than I have with my bows. Funny how that works, isn't it?



Jim C said:


> in the bigots world you call it cheating-in the world of intelligent people we call it ethical to use a bow you can master more easily since there is no competition involved


Naww. Its just cheating.

Ethical is restricting your shots to a range that you are proficient at with the weapon designed for the season you are hunting in, not whining for a rules change and grabbing an easier and more advantaged weapon to extend your range for you.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

JDMiller said:


> Ky Mustang........... I'll answer some of your questions you brought up.
> 
> 1. The UCBK supported the other candidate. As president of the UCBK I never posted nor stated anything against Ronnie. The problem that a few have with Ronnie is the LKS Board of Directors voted to support the decision of the KDF&WR Commission.....which was voted on for full expansion. This was what should have been supported but instead the LKS/Ronnie was a public focal point of the compromise .....which there was no crossbow supporters in attendance. The 2nd district LKS president even drafted a letter prior to the compromise , to be signed by Ronnie.....which was never done and at no time did he make any vocal show of support . These actions or lack of action was a lot of the reason for resentment. I have nothing personal against Ronnie and the guys that made their point known......well their big boys...its their decision and like everything else of this process....their pretty fustrated.
> 
> 
> We will probably meet face to face in the near future Jd and I look foward to it. You seem to be a really good person from the posts you
> 2. UCBK Membership....... For 2006 we have on the list 30 members. Only 5 of those are non-residents and none from Canada. 25 members are needed for LKS affiliation and all 25 of the UCBK's are Kentucky residents like you and me and pay Kentucky taxes. Our membership will only get larger.
> 
> As far as Bow clubs....... there were 6 new clubs out of the 3rd district alone ......5 were archery oriented and this provided 12 more votes in addition to one of the districts with the most clubs anyway. All in all.... I view this is good .......it shows sportsman involvement which is needed more that what the continued division ......like fighting other hunters ....such as whats going on in this thread.
> 
> 3. LKS Resolution votes ....... the votes are done by show of hands. The crossbow resolution failed but to state it failed by 11 -130 is mis-leading. The moderator asked for show of support...at that point it was easily decided it failed . They never asked for a show of those opposed....and there is nothing making you vote on any resolution.....otherwords the delegates of any paticiular club could and did remain neutral on certain issues....I personally saw many that did not vote either way. I dont know their reasons from abstaining from certain votes but it did happen. I will also add that it was stated by the LKS BOD there were 146 delegates present . Your figures add up to 141.
> 
> Myself and my daughter were delegates for the UCBK........ we met a lot of good people on both sides of the fence on this issue. If you were there ....or as it seems your making out that way.....I wished you would have introduced yourself. You might be suprised that were not as evil as some make this issue out to be. However ....I dont recall seeing you there.


My questions were not directed at you , but thats ok appreciate the reply. I realize you did not post anything directly , but did the ucbk vice president?
Have you ever had Canadian members of the ucbk?
Was there an attempt to contact the ucbk at the comprimise meeting?
I am through arguing with Jim because of what you just stated its never going to get anywhere.
For the record would you please tell Jim your opion that I have seen you post btw, Do you think a crossbow is easier to shoot accurately than a bow of anykind. As a president of a crossbow club maybe he will value your opion.

I am not arguing about the lks , I feel there has been enough bad posted in the recent past. The lks is an excellent group and very important to ky sportsman.

We will probably meet face to face in the near future Jd and I look foward to it. You seem to be a really good fellow


----------



## thesource

JDMiller said:


> thesource....... for 2005 it was around 28 members .....and it was about a split on residents & non-residents. The LKS....does not require a member to be a resident......so your point is kinda moot. There were a lot of new archery clubs....as I stated ....they only had 25 members listed. Should we question their members.....in my opinion it does'nt matter.
> 
> In 2005 there were around 130 delegates for clubs. Each club is allowed 2 delegates....the UCBK's two votes did not cancel anything out for the KBA. Fact being there are numberous archery clubs with delegate voting powers.....I really dont know what your getting at or even talking about. You might want to do a little more research before you comment.


You know exactly what I'm talking about. You couldn't find enough KY sportsmen who supported the crossbow enough to join UCBK to fill the eligibility to get into LKS. You recruited non-resident crossbow hunters to get into LKS - without them you would not have had enough members. Your 2 delegates saying yes essentially wiped out KBA (who had significantly more than 14 KY members) delegates voting no.

Legal - Yes. Ethical? Not at all. Very dirty tactics that circumvented the intent of the process.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> ANY hunter should limit the range he is willing to shoot at a deer to a distance he is sure he can make the shot at. One would expect that those who don't prtactice much would decrease their maximum range accordingly....that should be true whether the hunter in question has a bow, a crossbow, or a cannon.
> 
> It is totally dishonest to pretend that xbows would result in lower wounding losses than bows. In fact, we know that you have lost more deer with your crossbow than I have with my bows. Funny how that works, isn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> Naww. Its just cheating.
> 
> Ethical is restricting your shots to a range that you are proficient at with the weapon designed for the season you are hunting in, not whining for a rules change and grabbing an easier and more advantaged weapon to extend your range for you.



we don't know anything source other than your claims-claims I suspect are lies given your lies on other issues and the fact that you avoid answering questions-such as Willie asking you how many of your claimed kills were with a shotgun combined with the fact that not one person on this board can vouch for you on any relevant issue

crossbows don't extend my range source nor the range of most competent hunters so again you are full of it

I am still waiting for you and your quint to tell us how you are objectively harmed by what sort of Bow another man hunts with

calling it cheating is infantile and stupid-its not cheating the person who uses a crossbow

its not cheating you since it doesn't affect you

its not cheating the deer

apparently its only affecting the fragile egos of people like you who have your mythical status as a bowhunter as the only basis of support for their egos


----------



## KY MUSTANG

My last post to you Jim show us the last 3 years ohio bow v/s crossbow harvest 
See you Jim enjoyed the discussion you ,source ,and freerange have fun.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> My last post to you Jim show us the last 3 years ohio bow v/s crossbow harvest
> See you Jim enjoyed the discussion you ,source ,and freerange have fun.



In English please-this above comment doesn't make sense

I gave you the best data-that is relevant. crossbows harvest more deer in Ohio because there are more of them

can you answer the main question

HOW ARE YOU OBJECTIVELY HARMED BY WHAT SORT OF BOW ANOTHER HUNTER CHOOSES TO USE


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You know exactly what I'm talking about. You couldn't find enough KY sportsmen who supported the crossbow enough to join UCBK to fill the eligibility to get into LKS. You recruited non-resident crossbow hunters to get into LKS - without them you would not have had enough members. Your 2 delegates saying yes essentially wiped out KBA (who had significantly more than 14 KY members) delegates voting no.
> 
> Legal - Yes. Ethical? Not at all. Very dirty tactics that circumvented the intent of the process.


Dirty tricks

1) the PBS purveying lies in order to demonize crossbows by the publishing of the lie filled Marlow Report

2) Poop and Dung calling crossbows the single biggest threat to bowhunting-that is dirty and if there were true karma P&Y would cease to exist over that nonsense

3) basing opposition to crossbows on greed and selfishness since there are no objective facts to support anti xbow nonsense


----------



## willie

thesource said:


> In fact, we know that you have lost more deer with your crossbow than I have with my bows. Funny how that works, isn't it?


No.. we don't KNOW. We know what you have stated, but I am still waiting on an answer on how many of those 24 bucks that you supposedly killed were gun kills and how many weer bow kills (if any at all)..


----------



## willie

JD,

thesource is trying his best to muddy the wtaers.

I've caught hell from him because we recruited members from a CROSSBOW FORUM. 

Horrors!!

Did he think we would recruit members from bowsite or archery talk..
how utterly stupid of him.....


----------



## Jim C

willie said:


> No.. we don't KNOW. We know what you have stated, but I am still waiting on an answer on how many of those 24 bucks that you supposedly killed were gun kills and how many weer bow kills (if any at all)..



I double lunged (10 yard shot) a small 6 pointer that slid down a steep ravine. I didn't lose it-I just couldn't recover it . Source claims to have never lost a deer

I believe him-my mom has never lost a deer either


----------



## Jim C

willie said:


> JD,
> 
> thesource is trying his best to muddy the wtaers.
> 
> I've caught hell from him because we recruited members from a CROSSBOW FORUM.
> 
> Horrors!!
> 
> Did he think we would recruit members from bowsite or archery talk..
> how utterly stupid of him.....



KY sockpuppet was on this forum for 20 minutes after I asked her to explain how someone else's choice of archery gear affected her

needless to say-the silence is deafening


----------



## JDMiller

KY MUSTANG said:


> My questions were not directed at you , but thats ok appreciate the reply. I realize you did not post anything directly , but did the ucbk vice president?No...Kalen Watkins is vice-president
> Have you ever had Canadian members of the ucbk? Yes...when the club was established but the majority were out of Ohio & bordering states
> 
> 
> Was there an attempt to contact the ucbk at the comprimise meeting? Me & Kalen had contacted the UCBK & KBA to adress possible compromise negotiations if their organizations were willing to talk ...this was two weeks prior to the actual compromise and at the time of the compromise ....which we were in contact with them....no one stated anything about what was happening.
> 
> I am through arguing with Jim because of what you just stated its never going to get anywhere.
> For the record would you please tell Jim your opion that I have seen you post btw, Do you think a crossbow is easier to shoot accurately than a bow of anykind. As a president of a crossbow club maybe he will value your opion.
> 
> Ky.Mustang.....I've seen too many arguments like this and in the end there is only one major difference.....its held at full draw. That being said...there is a skill level with all archery equipment and the crossbow is no different. It is easier to the extent it requires less practice and its already drawn in the sight of game. Regardless of age, gender , stature or phisical abillity ....anyone can use a crossbow. Hence their use by those that cant draw a conventional bow .
> 
> Jim C.....is like many who is passionate about the sport . In my opinion he knows it all boils down to a lot of mis-information about crossbows . In the bigger picture of things....ease of use , accuracy and the fact they can be used by all .....are good things and worth being passionate about.
> 
> 
> I am not arguing about the lks , I feel there has been enough bad posted in the recent past. The lks is an excellent group and very important to ky sportsman.
> 
> Same here..... the LKS has done many good things for sportsmen of Kentucky. It's just a shame that this whole crossbow issue could'nt been handled without deviding the ranks.
> 
> We will probably meet face to face in the near future Jd and I look foward to it. You seem to be a really good fellow


Same here again.....I think most need to realize that even though we disagree on this issue but we probably agree on most others.


----------



## Jim C

I have always maintained that crossbows bring more people into archery season 

I think that is good

Source, Free Range the PBS and Poop and Dung agree with me on that essential point-they TOO admit that xbows bring more people into archery season

WHY NOT DEBATE WHETHER this is good or bad? the fact is Poop and Dung, the Prevaricating Bloviation Society and the odious NABC all want to limit entry into archery season based on a facade that slanders people who use crossbows

why can't these elitists be honest and argue the simple question


ARE MORE PEOPLE BOWHUNTING GOOD OR BAD

they can't do this-they feel a need to slander, denigrate and lie about people

its obvious they are greedy

I ask them why -if xbow hunters become the majority-as we have in ohio-we should treat them anymore charitably than they treat us

they never can answer that and in terms of public perception-there is a greater argument to ban trads as opposed to crossbows


----------



## JDMiller

thesource said:


> You know exactly what I'm talking about. You couldn't find enough KY sportsmen who supported the crossbow enough to join UCBK to fill the eligibility to get into LKS. You recruited non-resident crossbow hunters to get into LKS - without them you would not have had enough members. Your 2 delegates saying yes essentially wiped out KBA (who had significantly more than 14 KY members) delegates voting no.
> 
> Legal - Yes. Ethical? Not at all. Very dirty tactics that circumvented the intent of the process.



thesource...... I'm not denying the UCBK did not have non-residents in our membership. Again its a moot point because there are a lot of clubs in the LKS with non-residents. The LKS affiliation ....in the bigger picture of things does not make the laws. The KDF&WR & our legislators do. The LKS votes on resolutions ...do not make the laws.....they only suggest to the KDF&WR consider them. 

As far as dirty tricks to circumvent the intent of the process.........I guess if the UCBK did it ..... so did several new bow clubs.....they had only enough members to have LKS affiliation. ..... I guess their circumventing the process as well. Thats a joke to even think in that manner.......fact being the LKS welcomes any club that has enough dues paying members and with 146 delegates......2 votes or 50 is not going to sway the clubs that are not hunting oriented. 

You still need to do your research.


----------



## Free Range

> I have always maintained that crossbows bring more people into archery season


Agreed



> I think that is good


I think it could be bad



> Source, Free Range the PBS and Poop and Dung agree with me on that essential point-they TOO admit that xbows bring more people into archery season


Agreed



> WHY NOT DEBATE WHETHER this is good or bad? the fact is Poop and Dung, the Prevaricating Bloviation Society and the odious NABC all want to limit entry into archery season based on a facade that slanders people who use crossbows


I’m not sure who has slandered “people” that use x-bows. But if you want debate, then you take the first step and try to debate without calling names, lets see how long that last.



> why can't these elitists be honest and argue the simple question


I have on many occasion tried, without name calling, and everytime I back you or Ace into a corner the names start flying and Ace, plays the I won’t answer your question and takes is toys and goes home. If you want to debate then stick in there and keep your name calling at home.




> ARE MORE PEOPLE BOWHUNTING GOOD OR BAD


Could be bad.



> they can't do this-they feel a need to slander, denigrate and lie about people


Please point out any lies I have told about anyone.



> its obvious they are greedy


Obvious only in your eyes, and to those that are using greed to try to force themselves into archery season.



> I ask them why -if xbow hunters become the majority-as we have in ohio-we should treat them anymore charitably than they treat us


And I say this attitude is one good reason to fight the expansion. It only confirms our fears of the x-bow taking over.



> they never can answer that and in terms of public perception-there is a greater argument to ban trads as opposed to crossbows


I don’t know where you get your “public perception” but the public I talk to is the opposite.

So if you want honest debate, let’s get at it. How is more people in archery season better for bowhunting?


----------



## Jim C

it could have been bad to let more people in with compound bows. the bottom line is that we ought to treat compounds and crossbows the same and if people cause problems you boot them rather than engage in prior restraint by assuming that the people who enter archery season via the crossbow are somehow less ethical or less committed to hunting than those who use compounds

how is more people bowhunting good? political power

if you find bowhunting to be a worthwhile recreational activity why do you want to limit others participating in this activity

you can't seriously think that how you make the shot is really the essential intrinsic worth of bowhunting


----------



## Free Range

Political power, ok that’s a start. And what do we need this extra political power for. To keep bow season? To keep it from whom? The anti’s or from other hunters?


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> ONE post, it took one post for you to get off subject. I didn’t say the x-bow shooter is unethical, I asked you to explain why more people in bow season is good, simple really.



maybe you should explain why its bad

maybe you should explain why a compound v crossbow line is important

I amended my response to actually deal with that part of your point

btw supporting the PBS requires you to support an organization that has been proven a liar on the xbow issue


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Political power, ok that’s a start. And what do we need this extra political power for. To keep bow season? To keep it from whom? The anti’s or from other hunters?



bowhunting will be targeted by the antis before regular gun hunting

If you like bowhunting tell me why others should not be able to enjoy it based on what sort of bow they use


----------



## Free Range

> bowhunting will be targeted by the antis before regular gun hunting
> 
> If you like bowhunting tell me why others should not be able to enjoy it based on what sort of bow they use


This will work better if we explore one topic at a time. I will let you have the next question, first though lets finish this one. 

Bowhunting will be targeted first. Ok I agree that is probably true. Do you think we as bow hunters have the numbers now to withstand this attack, or that we will ever have the numbers needed? Or do you believe we will need the help of gun hunters and their votes to withstand the coming attacks by PETA and the like?


----------



## thesource

JDMiller said:


> As far as dirty tricks to circumvent the intent of the process.........I guess if the UCBK did it ..... so did several new bow clubs.....they had only enough members to have LKS affiliation. ..... I guess their circumventing the process as well.



Are you admitting it is a dirty trick? Are you suggesting that the several new bow clubs also had NR members as a majority?

If they did - I agree that they circumvented the process and I agree that is just as unethical.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> how is more people bowhunting good? political power


It is only increased political power IF the newbies have the same agenda. You cannot argue with that, period.



Jim C said:


> if you find bowhunting to be a worthwhile recreational activity why do you want to limit others participating in this activity


They need to be enjoying the SAME worthwhile recreational activity to even have it considered as worthwhile. Crossbow hunting is fundamentally different than bowhunting in that it requires NO archery skill. Is it worthwhile? absolutely. Should it be held during bowseason - absolutely not.



Jim C said:


> you can't seriously think that how you make the shot is really the essential intrinsic worth of bowhunting


It is the DEFINING characteristic of bowhunting....duh.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> maybe you should explain why a compound v crossbow line is important


That's simple - they are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT in their operation.

That's a pretty important line, don't you agree?


----------



## Love Bowhunting

thesource said:


> It is only increased political power IF the newbies have the same agenda. You cannot argue with that, period.
> 
> 
> 
> They need to be enjoying the SAME worthwhile recreational activity to even have it considered as worthwhile. Crossbow hunting is fundamentally different than bowhunting in that it requires NO archery skill. Is it worthwhile? absolutely. Should it be held during bowseason - absolutely not.
> 
> 
> 
> It is the DEFINING characteristic of bowhunting....duh.


Coming from someone who doesn't bowhunt and doesn't shoot a bow that is funny to say the least.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> This will work better if we explore one topic at a time. I will let you have the next question, first though lets finish this one.
> 
> Bowhunting will be targeted first. Ok I agree that is probably true. Do you think we as bow hunters have the numbers now to withstand this attack, or that we will ever have the numbers needed? Or do you believe we will need the help of gun hunters and their votes to withstand the coming attacks by PETA and the like?



the more the better. that's why your side's constant bashing of gun hunters is short sighted and selfish. 

EVEN IF xbow archers didn't help with this there are still good reasons to allow them to hunt-that is because I believe people should be free to do what they want-as long as it doesn't have a negative effect on society and especially if their actions are essentially the same as permitted actions of others

no one has come close to demonstrating that using a crossbow to hunt in bow season has any relevant difference to using a compound


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> It is only increased political power IF the newbies have the same agenda. You cannot argue with that, period.
> 
> 
> 
> They need to be enjoying the SAME worthwhile recreational activity to even have it considered as worthwhile. Crossbow hunting is fundamentally different than bowhunting in that it requires NO archery skill. Is it worthwhile? absolutely. Should it be held during bowseason - absolutely not.


If you actually understood archery and bowhunting you wouldn't say something this moronic. No archery skill-this comes from someone who has no standing or credentials in archery






thesource said:


> It is the DEFINING characteristic of bowhunting....duh.


wrong again source-again you are not in a position to tell me how to define something you have far less knowledge of than I do


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> That's simple - they are FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT in their operation.
> 
> That's a pretty important line, don't you agree?



not as different as compound and trad bow

the "differences" mean nothing in the field or on the herd. You are the master of making mountains out of minor molehills while running face first into the tree trunk since you can't see the forest


----------



## Jim C

Love Bowhunting said:


> Coming from someone who doesn't bowhunt and doesn't shoot a bow that is funny to say the least.


I have been waiting for weeks for someone to vouch for the source

I might as well ask for someone to show me a full head mount of a Yeti


----------



## Love Bowhunting

If crossbow archery is not archery I wonder why the IBO has an XBOW class. There is also xbow competition at the World Archery Festival The NCA is an affiliate of the NAA as well.

Any crossbow organizations affiliated with obvious firearm organizations?


----------



## Jim C

Love Bowhunting said:


> If crossbow archery is not archery I wonder why the IBO has an XBOW class. There is also xbow competition at the World Archery Festival The NCA is an affiliate of the NAA as well.
> 
> Any crossbow organizations affiliated with obvious firearm organizations?



source howls that the NAA (founded in 1879) or the NFAA (thirties IIRC) arent really archery since they don't limit their activities to bowhunting-instead he prefers Poop and Dung even though Poop and Dung was founded well after the start of archery seasons (they whined about compounds too at one time)


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> not as different as compound and trad bow


OK, Ivy League - let me break this down so you can understand it.

compounds and traditional bows are mechanically different - agreed. The "compound" part reduces the held weight allowing it to be held at full draw longer .... and that is it. Fundamentally they are the same.

FUNDAMENTALLY different is just that. Fundamentally. Crossbows are fundamentally different than any vertical bow, even one held back with a draw lock. Fundamentally different.

You look very bad when you say stupid things like this.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> OK, Ivy League - let me break this down so you can understand it.
> 
> compounds and traditional bows are mechanically different - agreed. The "compound" part reduces the held weight allowing it to be held at full draw longer .... and that is it. Fundamentally they are the same.
> 
> FUNDAMENTALLY different is just that. Fundamentally. Crossbows are fundamentally different than any vertical bow, even one held back with a draw lock. Fundamentally different.
> 
> You look very bad when you say stupid things like this.


you are the ultimate champion of form over substance-to game managers, non hunting members of the public, the government-basically anyone but the cult of greed, crossbows and compound bows are essentially the same and ARE statistically the same in EVERY area that has legal, ethical and Game management implications

your braying about differences is an outcome based bit of sophistry designed to facilitate and justify your greed, selfishness and self image problems.

your ranting is as relevant as a guy who uses a pump action shotgun claiming he deserves a longer duck or quail season than a guy using a semi auto

lets take a poll of who has said the most stupid things on this topic source-that you can't even prove you bowhunt and since you have admitted that you have never hunted with a crossbow pretty much wraps that award up for you


----------



## thesource

No Jim, pumps and semi-autos are not fundamentally different. Shoulder, release the safety, aim and pull the trigger - they are fundamentally the same to shoot. They are also fundamentally the same as shooting a crossbow.

Bows, on the other hand, are fundamentally different.

Hope this clears up your confusion.


----------



## Free Range

> EVEN IF xbow archers didn't help with this there are still good reasons to allow them to hunt-that is because I believe people should be free to do what they want-as long as it doesn't have a negative effect on society and especially if their actions are essentially the same as permitted actions of others


Ok, so we have determined that political power is really not that big a deal, that what we need is more hunters, not just more people in archery season. That is what will help in the political arena. 
So we can close that one, now what is your question?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> No Jim, pumps and semi-autos are not fundamentally different. Shoulder, release the safety, aim and pull the trigger - they are fundamentally the same to shoot. They are also fundamentally the same as shooting a crossbow.
> 
> Bows, on the other hand, are fundamentally different.
> 
> Hope this clears up your confusion.



you claiming to edify anyone on this is akin to a tweaker claiming he can educate the faculty of the harvard medical school

your confusion about crossbows apparently is similar to your confusion about guns

the bottom line source-and the argument that destroys your simple form over substance hysteria-xbows and compounds, on all grounds that legitimately matter to anyone other than greedy cultists-are statistically the same


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Ok, so we have determined that political power is really not that big a deal, that what we need is more hunters, not just more people in archery season. That is what will help in the political arena.
> So we can close that one, now what is your question?


wrong-as usual-I am merely demonstrating that there are alternative justifiable reasons for destroying the archery apartheid and greed based exclusions you crave

what part of freedom are you upset with when you have absolutely no evidence that the freedom-when exercised-harms not you or society?


----------



## Free Range

> what part of freedom are you upset with when you have absolutely no evidence that the freedom-when exercised-harms not you or society?


That is absurd, how many freedoms would fall under your insane definition? Anyhow as has already been decided by some courts you don’t have a “right” to hunt with a x-bow, and your freedom to hunt is not being abridged. There are many people with the proper license that can shoot a fully automatic rifle, should they be allowed the “freedom” to hunt with them.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> the bottom line source-and the argument that destroys your simple form over substance hysteria-xbows and compounds, on all grounds that legitimately matter to anyone other than greedy cultists-are statistically the same


The bottom line is that crossbows are fundamentally different than real bows, do not require ANY archery skills to shoot, and do not belong in bowseasons.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> The bottom line is that crossbows are fundamentally different than real bows, do not require ANY archery skills to shoot, and do not belong in bowseasons.



this is the opinion of someone ignorant about archery. thus the opinion is without merit.

when you learn how to shoot a bow come back and beg our forgiveness for making such a moronic comment


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> That is absurd, how many freedoms would fall under your insane definition? Anyhow as has already been decided by some courts you don’t have a “right” to hunt with a x-bow, and your freedom to hunt is not being abridged. There are many people with the proper license that can shoot a fully automatic rifle, should they be allowed the “freedom” to hunt with them.


still stuck on stupid arguments I see. fully automatic weapons perform far differently than traditional hunting weapons and are not legal for hunting by anyone in any state.

try again-work a bit harder-this is 2nd grade level thinking you exhibit here


----------



## Free Range

> still stuck on stupid arguments I see. fully automatic weapons perform far differently than traditional hunting weapons and are not legal for hunting by anyone in any state.


Lets see, you pull a trigger and it shoots, works on both the same way. Because it’s not legal, makes it fair? Then it’s not legal to use a x-bow in most states, that should end this discussion. 

Now if you don’t mind did you have a real question about x-bows, or are you just going to claim we never answer your questions, the ones you don’t ask?


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Lets see, you pull a trigger and it shoots, works on both the same way. Because it’s not legal, makes it fair? Then it’s not legal to use a x-bow in most states, that should end this discussion.
> 
> Now if you don’t mind did you have a real question about x-bows, or are you just going to claim we never answer your questions, the ones you don’t ask?



same as a compound release-you pull a trigger and its shoots

actually crossbows are legal to use in most states hunting seasons to varying extents so you are either a liar or ignorant. what is your argument going to be when they are legalized fully? you sound like someone in 1973 whining about compounds-when they were legalized you all kept braying but you didn't even have that argument left


----------



## Free Range

You got me there Jim, I assumed that you knew we were talking about bow season, and legal use for able bodied persons, during said bow season. But It’s my fault for assuming you could grasp such a simple idea. Let me restate it for you, x-bows are not legal bowhunting equipment in most states during bow season for able bodied persons. So does that end the debate? Not legal means they shouldn’t be, is that what you are saying about fully automatic rifles?

And do you have a real question? We already decided there is no political reason for x-bows, now maybe since you don’t have a real question we can go back to mine, what good will the x-bow do for bow hunting?


----------



## Free Range

> same as a compound release-you pull a trigger and its shoots


I don’t use one so I wouldn’t know, but they tell me with a back tension release you don’t pull a trigger, is that correct?


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> I don’t use one so I wouldn’t know, but they tell me with a back tension release you don’t pull a trigger, is that correct?



real bt releases like the original stan are supposed to be shot without pulling anything but many people shoot them by squeezing their fist. those aren't releases that more than a few people hunt with. the carter "back tension" and true ball "back tension" are sometimes used but they have a thumb activated trigger. 90% of the hunters use the wrist caliper release which is shot with the trigger finger. I use a carter because you can leave it hanging on the D loop of your bow


----------



## KidKy24

Free Range said:


> You got me there Jim, I assumed that you knew we were talking about bow season, and legal use for able bodied persons, during said bow season. But It’s my fault for assuming you could grasp such a simple idea. Let me restate it for you, x-bows are not legal bowhunting equipment in most states during bow season for able bodied persons. So does that end the debate? Not legal means they shouldn’t be, is that what you are saying about fully automatic rifles?
> 
> And do you have a real question? We already decided there is no political reason for x-bows, now maybe since you don’t have a real question we can go back to mine, what good will the x-bow do for bow hunting?




he already told u - more hunters are a GOOD thing - THAT is a political reason for x-bows.


----------



## KidKy24

Free Range said:


> I don’t use one so I wouldn’t know, but they tell me with a back tension release you don’t pull a trigger, is that correct?



u mean u don't even know?! and still want to argue about it?! u guys are AMAZING....


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> I don’t use one so I wouldn’t know, but they tell me with a back tension release you don’t pull a trigger, is that correct?



Did "they" also tell you that back tension releases are scarcer than hen's teeth in the deer hunting woods?


.


----------



## thesource

So what?

Free Range is too accomodating, trying to focus attention on the fact that there are many ways to shoot a compound.

I am much more direct...there is only one way to shoot a crossbow. Pull the trigger, just like a gun.

I could care less if releases have triggers. Its another weak excuse for crossbowers to say that releases are even similar to a crossbow trigger. Even if a release were exactly like a gun trigger (which it is not, but a crossbow trigger is) there are still many other archery only skills required to shoot a bow that simply are not necessary to fire a crossbow.

The idiotic attempt to claim that a release wipes away a crossbows advantages is totally preposterous. If it is so easy, then there is absolutely no need for crossbows....everyone should simply buy a release and a compound and hit the woods.

Why don't they? Oh, yea, Twogun told me once. They have more "confidence" in the crossbow - which is another way of saying they are not good enoough with a compound.

Why aren't they good enough with a compound? Because it is not as easy as you point and shoot crossbowers make it out to be.

Why not tell the truth ... you shoot a crossbow because it allows you the greatest effective range, the ability to shoot without having to draw in the presence of deer, the ability to stay ready to shoot (at full draw) indefinitely.... it advantages you and gives you a better chance to get your deer, which is all you care about.

It has nothing to do with bowhunting - it has everything to do with an easier way to get your deer.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> you claiming to edify anyone on this is akin to a tweaker claiming he can educate the faculty of the harvard medical school
> 
> your confusion about crossbows apparently is similar to your confusion about guns
> 
> the bottom line source-and the argument that destroys your simple form over substance hysteria-xbows and compounds, on all grounds that legitimately matter to anyone other than greedy cultists-are statistically the same


 That looks like a statement a petty trial layer would make and then pat himself on the back afterwards. Just too funny.:hail:


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> That looks like a statement a petty trial layer would make and then pat himself on the back afterwards. Just too funny.:hail:



actually its a statement an experienced archery coach would make when dealing with people who bash other bowhunters while being ignorant about archery


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> actually its a statement an experienced archery coach would make when dealing with people who bash other bowhunters while being ignorant about archery


Crossbow hunters are in no form or fashion bow hunters. 

pinchi calbrone ~ jim


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Crossbow hunters are in no form or fashion bow hunters.
> 
> pinchi calbrone ~ jim



well the IBO differs with you

its your opinion that I find in error and more and more states reject your nonsense too

other than that do you have any argument against xbows in bow season
say an argument based on facts or logic?


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Well here is one states opion on it.:wink: 
http://fw.ky.gov/huntexemptcross.asp


http://fw.ky.gov/huntexempt.asp?lid=948&NavPath=C151

and they are still defined as seperate weapons 
http://fw.ky.gov/prop06seasons.asp?lid=1330&NavPath=C151

so pat your self on the back some more coach. I dont think you are hunting or deciding how a state defines their laws during your class


----------



## awshucks

Since this is one of the last threads not locked, and w/ the new rules in place, I'm going to risk boring ya'll a bit. I'm 59 and started shooting a 25# stick bow when I was about 8 yrs old. No coach, help, nothing. Spent every waking moment shooting it at Tide boxes full of hay [on farm] hunting on my knees for arrows under the grass, or doing chores to get the loot for more arrows which were 35 cents each or 3 for a buck at the "Piggly Wiggly". I was doing what had been done basically the same for centuries. For some reason, I shot right handed and I'm a lefty, so that haunted me in later yrs w/ a compound. Which guys, imho was the death knell of archery as it had been. I seriously doubt if any kids today start out the way I did. I know what they are missing out on. Do any of you stop to think that we live in the era that changed archery forever? It took me forever to hit that dang soap box more than just once in awhile. Today almost anyone can take their checkbook to a pro shop and get a complicated machine set up for them, and be able to hit a paper plate at 20-25 yds in no time, which will marginally granted allow them to take deer. Not good enough for me or I suspect most of you, but still that much is very easy to attain. Was the intro of the compound good or bad?? I don't know, guess history will have to be the judge on that one. You guys that can should take a stick, string, arrow, and a kid shooting if you get the chance. Have a nice day and good shooting to ya.


----------



## Free Range

KidKy24, or is this Ace? Anyhow, claiming more is good does not cut it, why is more good? As Jim said there really isn’t enough to help, we need the support of gun hunters too. So why don’t you answer the question why is more good, do you think the added numbers of people in bow season will give us the power we need to fight off the anti’s? Or do you agree we need ALL HUNTERS to fight them? 

And just because I don’t know you I will help you out, when I said I don’t use one, I meant a back tension release, really not that hard to follow everyone else understood it.


----------



## Free Range

So how about it Jim, you going to discuss this or just go off again on another rant? How is more in archery season good? Or if you want I'm satisfied, with your first answer, now you ask one.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> So how about it Jim, you going to discuss this or just go off again on another rant? How is more in archery season good? Or if you want I'm satisfied, with your first answer, now you ask one.



of course its good for the reasons I mentioned
furthermore, its hard to justify legally saying its ok for you to enjoy it and others not to based on differences that mean nothing from a societal or legal point of view.


----------



## Free Range

So are we to take from your refusal to answer, that you have no “good” reason to allow the x-bow in bow season? Does it just boil down to you believe people should be allowed the choice? That there really is no factual reason, or no positive it will bring? I’m fine with that reasoning, that is your opinion and we are all allowed our opinion. 

Anybody else up for the challenge, why is adding the x-bow to hunting season, good for bow season?


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> So are we to take from your refusal to answer, that you have no “good” reason to allow the x-bow in bow season? Does it just boil down to you believe people should be allowed the choice? That there really is no factual reason, or no positive it will bring? I’m fine with that reasoning, that is your opinion and we are all allowed our opinion.
> 
> Anybody else up for the challenge, why is adding the x-bow to hunting season, good for bow season?



we are no longer allowed to debate xbows per the rules-the issue is adding more participants to the bow season which of course is the real argument anyway. I close in noting that if you claim we have a duty to prove why choice is good, the same arguments are EQUALLY VALID as to bow season in general and the addition of compounds. I have already answered why more people is a good and you apparently pretend to ignore it


----------



## Free Range

I must of missed the new rules. So why are more people in archery season good? You said for political power, we quickly decided you are wrong, that what we really need is more hunters, that the possibility of adding enough hunters to bow season to make a real difference against the anti’s is very slim. And it stalled there, now it’s your turn to explain, or give a good reason why more people are a good thing for bow season. 

I say we have plenty of people in bow season now to make it a viable season, and that more is always welcome as long as they shoot a bow. I don’t see how adding more just for the sake of adding more will improve the season, or make us politically stronger in any way that counts.


----------



## Free Range

Ok I see the new rules, I take it this cuts both ways.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> I must of missed the new rules. So why are more people in archery season good? You said for political power, we quickly decided you are wrong, that what we really need is more hunters, that the possibility of adding enough hunters to bow season to make a real difference against the anti’s is very slim. And it stalled there, now it’s your turn to explain, or give a good reason why more people are a good thing for bow season.
> 
> I say we have plenty of people in bow season now to make it a viable season, and that more is always welcome as long as they shoot a bow. I don’t see how adding more just for the sake of adding more will improve the season, or make us politically stronger in any way that counts.


that you decided I was wrong has no relevance or merit

the duty is on you to explain why there should be less people in archery season and why you should be able to enjoy the extended season based upon meaningless and minor differences involving gear

if adding people won't help against the antis then adding people won't have a deleterious impact on those who think that the season belongs to them and others should face artificial and nonsensical barriers before they can partake


----------



## Free Range

Ok, well that ends it, thanks for conceding that you have no point.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Ok, well that ends it, thanks for conceding that you have no point.



thanks for admitting you have no argument

I made several points-that you don't have the ability to refute them matters not to me

you have to prove that restricting the choice of others to enjoy something you also enjoy is based upon proof that their use of slightly different gear has a deleterious effect upon society

you cannot

prove that bowhunting is good-to a point but too many people participating is "bad"


this is why people like you will continue to lose-you ignore reality and you have to take hypocritical positions on why people should or should not be able to enjoy a publicly owned recreational activity


----------



## KidKy24

Free Range said:


> KidKy24, or is this Ace? Anyhow, claiming more is good does not cut it, why is more good? As Jim said there really isn’t enough to help, we need the support of gun hunters too. So why don’t you answer the question why is more good, do you think the added numbers of people in bow season will give us the power we need to fight off the anti’s? Or do you agree we need ALL HUNTERS to fight them?
> 
> And just because I don’t know you I will help you out, when I said I don’t use one, I meant a back tension release, really not that hard to follow everyone else understood it.


nope, not ace. are u really making an argument that more hunters is a bad thing?! u anti's really confuse me sometimes....

as far as the release comment - hey man, u wrote it not me:smile:


----------



## Free Range

Apparently it’s not all that hard to confuse you. I never said more hunters is a bad thing, maybe a reading comprehension class wouldn’t hurt you any. I asked how is more people in bow season good for bow season, if you don’t have an answer then, maybe it would be best if you didn’t reply. That old saying comes to mind, it’s better to keep quiet and let people think you a fool, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.


----------



## Free Range

> prove that bowhunting is good-to a point but too many people participating is "bad"


Most people I know, bow hunt because it’s a solitary sport, or at least that is one of the major reason’s they bow hunt. Adding legislation that would severely increase the number of people in bow season would make it a bad thing, for many. Personally if I can see someone else in a tree while I’m bow hunting is not a good thing, and trying to get a shot at spooky deer with a bow is not a good thing. 

If more people in bow season is good, and the more the better, then why not open it up to guns as well? That would bring plenty of people into bow season, or at least what once was bow season.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Apparently it’s not all that hard to confuse you. I never said more hunters is a bad thing, maybe a reading comprehension class wouldn’t hurt you any. I asked how is more people in bow season good for bow season, if you don’t have an answer then, maybe it would be best if you didn’t reply. That old saying comes to mind, it’s better to keep quiet and let people think you a fool, then to open your mouth and remove all doubt.



getting a bit testy aren't we
Its been asked and answered numerous times

Do you admit or deny that more bowhunters is a positive thing for 

a) political power
b) for the money it generates to the government thus giving the government more of an interest in protecting it
c) for the manufacturers


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Most people I know, bow hunt because it’s a solitary sport, or at least that is one of the major reason’s they bow hunt. Adding legislation that would severely increase the number of people in bow season would make it a bad thing, for many. Personally if I can see someone else in a tree while I’m bow hunting is not a good thing, and trying to get a shot at spooky deer with a bow is not a good thing.
> 
> If more people in bow season is good, and the more the better, then why not open it up to guns as well? That would bring plenty of people into bow season, or at least what once was bow season.


1) this is bow season-you do understand that guns are not bows and a 4 month gun season would be deleterious

2) so what you are saying is along as you are in that is good but if another guy wants to its bad?


----------



## Free Range

> getting a bit testy aren't we
> Its been asked and answered numerous times
> 
> Do you admit or deny that more bowhunters is a positive thing for
> 
> a) political power
> b) for the money it generates to the government thus giving the government more of an interest in protecting it
> c) for the manufacturers


No not testy at all, just a bit bored with those that don’t keep up. 


a)	as discussed I don’t think bow hunters alone will have any affect, I believe it’s has to be all hunters, fighting the anti’s before it will do any good. Bow hunters fighting to save bow season without the help of gun hunters would be like spitting in the ocean, IMO. 
b)	I believe we generate enough now to give them a reason to protect it, and again the money generated, in most states, by bowhunters is nothing compared to gun hunters, and our numbers would have to grow by 10 fold before it would get any attention by the DNR, and only by bringing in guns would we ever accomplish that. And then it wouldn’t be bow season any longer would it. 
c)	Yes it would be good for them, but I fail to see how that would be good for bow season. 



> 1)	this is bow season-you do understand that guns are not bows and a 4 month gun season would be deleterious


How long is the gun season in TX?


----------



## Jim C

we are talking about Kentucky

what I love is how your side puts burdens of proof on people that if applied years ago would have meant we never had an archery season or a compound season


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Do you admit or deny that more bowhunters is a positive thing for
> 
> a) political power
> b) for the money it generates to the government thus giving the government more of an interest in protecting it
> c) for the manufacturers


More bowhunters, yes. More hunters in bowseason - not necessarily.

a) Political power - more hunters in bowseason is only a positive thing politically if the new hunters have similar interests and values, a similar agenda. Nothing is more destructive than opposing agendas - See KY, 2005-6, with the scorched earth policies that ensued from both sides of opposing factions, all of which are considered hunters in bowseason by the state now. 

b) Money it generates for the government - this would be a positive for the government, certainly. It does not necessarily equate to a positive for bowhunting. There are NUMEROUS ways to increase money for the government - additional special seasons, increasing tag fees, additional special seasons....you get the idea.:angel: 

c) For manufacturers - this should be independent. Anyone who advocates change for the manufacturer's sake and not bowhunting's sake is a traitor to bowhunting ... see point A about opposing agendas.


----------



## Jim C

There should be no opposing agendas-everyone should want to protect bowhunting from those who want to ban it. since you have already admitted there is no harm by allowing expanding the definition of bows, those who have as an agenda, keeping others out of bow season apparently have something other than the best interests of bowhunting in mind

By definition-if you are hunting in bowseason legally you are a bowhunter-and one cannot determine who is a "real bowhunter" based on what sort of bow they use


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> By definition-if you are hunting in bowseason legally you are a bowhunter


A) I don't agree that your statement is correct, but.....

B) If it is correct, that means that the vast majority of states and provinces have "bowhunter" defined correctly, a few do not - by definition, as you say.

I'm willing to accept that majority definition of a bowhunter - lol.

Its obvious we cannot talk around the edges of this. I am a bowhunter, which means I will follow the rules, and adhere to Ox's edict. Get your last word in, Jim .....


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> A) I don't agree that your statement is correct, but.....
> 
> B) If it is correct, that means that the vast majority of states and provinces have "bowhunter" defined correctly, a few do not - by definition, as you say.
> 
> I'm willing to accept that majority definition of a bowhunter - lol.
> 
> Its obvious we cannot talk around the edges of this. I am a bowhunter, which means I will follow the rules, and adhere to Ox's edict. Get your last word in, Jim .....


the issue isn't bows or how some people choose to define them in order to advance an agenda-the issue is whether more people partaking in and utilizing archery season is good

you can't conclude that everyone using a certain bow is more committed to the season than others using a different bow

is more people (without qualifying it ) enjoying bow season good or bad

I say it is GOOD


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> we are talking about Kentucky
> 
> what I love is how your side puts burdens of proof on people that if applied years ago would have meant we never had an archery season or a compound season


 Thats right Jim we are talking about Ky. The issue's in ky have been dealt with  . What you need to realize is there are certain places that the resource does not need additional pressure.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Thats right Jim we are talking about Ky. The issue's in ky have been dealt with  . What you need to realize is there are certain places that the resource does not need additional pressure.



if there are too many people-draw for spots-dont make artificial exclusions based on stupid reasons.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> if there are too many people-draw for spots-dont make artificial exclusions based on stupid reasons.


 Jim ,Ky makes no artificial exclusions, there is a season for each weapon. I agree with you on the draw, I guess you mean draw for a tag? I am fine with that being in place for non residents. This would not be fair to land owning residents or residents that hunt public ground in my opion .
The main places that have to much pressure are public areas,so you think
just because they don't own their own land and are already hunting highly pressured areas , they should have to draw for the areas and risk not being able to hunt that year. Is this your idea of opportunity?


----------



## Free Range

> what I love is how your side puts burdens of proof on people that if applied years ago would have meant we never had an archery season or a compound season


Wrong again Jim, archery season did not take over an existing season, it was generated where there was no existing season. Now as for compounds, you may be correct, but that isn’t the basis for this discussion, that horse is already out of the barn.



> If there are too many people-draw for spots-dont make artificial exclusions based on stupid reasons.


And that right there folks would be a negative. Just as opening the season up to all weapons and putting restrictions on bag limits, or counting on 100% harvest rates and limiting the number of people that hunt. It all boils down to the same thing. Spreading out hunters is good, concentrating them is bad. There is nothing wrong with the way things are now, Bow season in most states is still a fairly low pressure, solitary sport. Everyone has an equal chance to hunt, (as decided in at least two courts). Adding more people in bow season by limiting the “skill” factor will artificially raise the number of hunters in bow season, with no added benefit, to the existing bow hunters, the deer heard, and in most cases, (because they don’t charge extra) no added revenue to the state. So that leaves the mfg’s looks like they are the only real winners in this artificial increase in hunter numbers during archery season.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Wrong again Jim, archery season did not take over an existing season, it was generated where there was no existing season. Now as for compounds, you may be correct, but that isn’t the basis for this discussion, that horse is already out of the barn.


as usual, a misunderstanding on your part

archers got a season because 

1) they lobbied for it
2) there was no good reason not to allow it

compounds got into the season because

1) they lobbied for it
2) there were no good reasons advanced opposing it (and those same lame arguments are resurfacing today

what I mean in terms of burden is that both of those groups merely demonstrated that they wanted something and there was no rational opposition

if they had to prove they were "good" they never could have met that based on the standards that you now attempt to impose

consistency is lacking on the excluders side of the aisle





A


Free Range said:


> nd that right there folks would be a negative. Just as opening the season up to all weapons and putting restrictions on bag limits, or counting on 100% harvest rates and limiting the number of people that hunt. It all boils down to the same thing. Spreading out hunters is good, concentrating them is bad. There is nothing wrong with the way things are now, Bow season in most states is still a fairly low pressure, solitary sport. Everyone has an equal chance to hunt, (as decided in at least two courts). Adding more people in bow season by limiting the “skill” factor will artificially raise the number of hunters in bow season, with no added benefit, to the existing bow hunters, the deer heard, and in most cases, (because they don’t charge extra) no added revenue to the state. So that leaves the mfg’s looks like they are the only real winners in this artificial increase in hunter numbers during archery season.



stay on topic-all weapons are not at issue
the skill factor has very little to do with making the shot


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> if there are too many people-draw for spots.



That would be taking hunters out of bow season.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> That would be taking hunters out of bow season.


if there are more hunters than the herd can sustain there is no other or fair way. it sure beats a phony "meritocracy" based on stereotypes of bow use


----------



## willie

KY MUSTANG said:


> Thats right Jim we are talking about Ky. The issue's in ky have been dealt with  . What you need to realize is there are certain places that the resource does not need additional pressure.


KY isn't one of them though, is it?

.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

willie said:


> KY isn't one of them though, is it?
> 
> .


 Yes, Willie there are certain places that do not need added pressure, have you hunted in every corner of the state? And there are public lands(in Ky) that the archery harvest is 80% or better of the entire harvest, several as a matter of fact, so what does that tell you?


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> if there are more hunters than the herd can sustain there is no other or fair way. it sure beats a phony "meritocracy" based on stereotypes of bow use


You already know what the fair way is - separate seasons.

Why artificially inflate bowhunter numbers? Why not create separate seasons for those who are not true bowhunters?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You already know what the fair way is - separate seasons.
> 
> Why artificially inflate bowhunter numbers? Why not create separate seasons for those who are not true bowhunters?



still hung up on making phony divisions based on what kind of bow they want

I would love to hear how you propose to divide up the current season

btw most guys I know would rather have 2 months of really good hunting (october-november) and 2 more months than one and one just to keep a small vocal minority happy

why don't you tell me what you would propose


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> if there are more hunters than the herd can sustain there is no other or fair way. it sure beats a phony "meritocracy" based on stereotypes of bow use



Well, there's no system like that now. No claim of overhunting, right? Hunters that desire to use a crossbow are not prevented from using a bow currently, so there is no exclusion.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> Well, there's no system like that now. No claim of overhunting, right? Hunters that desire to use a crossbow are not prevented from using a bow currently, so there is no exclusion.


lots of people prefer to use the bow of their choice-not the one that the excluders want to force on them


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> lots of people prefer to use the bow of their choice-not the one that the excluders want to force on them


 I will have to call you on that, if there is anyone trying to force anything ..... who would that be?.......................... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm intersting thought there jim


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I will have to call you on that, if there is anyone trying to force anything ..... who would that be?.......................... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm intersting thought there jim


name a state where xbow proponents have told people using other bows they have to use an xbow.

your concept of "force" is funny

I guess blacks "forced" the dilution of white voting power too?


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> lots of people prefer to use the bow of their choice-not the one that the excluders want to force on them


If adding crossbows leads to a quota, then crossbow use will be the cause of exclusion of hunters regardless of choice. Without quotas, there is no exclusion, period. ALL hunters can participate if they make the choice.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> If adding crossbows leads to a quota, then crossbow use will be the cause of exclusion of hunters regardless of choice. Without quotas, there is no exclusion, period. ALL hunters can participate if they make the choice.


wrong again-if there are quotas it means that more people want to bowhunt

nothing more nothing less

furthermore if quotas were needed due to xbows that means xbows had increased the number of bowhunters

a campaign ad that would increase compound hunting could have the same effect in some areas.

artificial barriers based on lies and disinformation are not something honest americans should support


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> wrong again-if there are quotas it means that more people want to bowhunt
> 
> nothing more nothing less
> 
> furthermore if quotas were needed due to xbows that means xbows had increased the number of bowhunters
> 
> a campaign ad that would increase compound hunting could have the same effect in some areas.
> 
> artificial barriers based on lies and disinformation are not something honest americans should support


 There is quiet a bit of opposition in Ky ......Jim.... you know that . The dept tried to force it on the hunters of Ky by surveying less than 2% of the hunters. By the way it was done it was forced whether you like it or not. 

Their time would be better spent getting more public hunting land to increase opportunity .There are plenty out their that want to hunt, they just do not have a place to do so.

btw your logic of a quota is funny::chortle:


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> There is quiet a bit of opposition in Ky ......Jim.... you know that . The dept tried to force it on the hunters of Ky by surveying less than 2% of the hunters. By the way it was done it was forced whether you like it or not.
> 
> Their time would be better spent getting more public hunting land to increase opportunity .There are plenty out their that want to hunt, they just do not have a place to do so.
> 
> btw your logic of a quota is funny::chortle:


My goal is eliminating the lies and bigotry that infects some segments of bowhunters. Its hard to fight the lies of the antis when people on "our side" engage in lies themselves


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> My goal is eliminating the lies and bigotry that infects some segments of bowhunters. Its hard to fight the lies of the antis when people on "our side" engage in lies themselves


 I am not interested in spreading any lies Jim. I think what "new" seasons are adapted in a state should reflect what all the sportsman of that state want, not 3600 out of all of them as the case in ky. We have a fair season for crossbow hunters in Ky now. If they want to hunt the bow season there is nothing stopping them from doing so, if they are handicapped they can get a permit to use a crossbow all season. That is the way it should be imo. No bigotry. There is a lot of passion involved for each weapon, there is nothing wrong with either side defending what is true and known. I just don't think the bow side causes all the division and fighting that they are blamed for, but some how everyone of their points is always pointed at as greed or lies by your side.


----------



## spec

Well stated Mustang!


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I am not interested in spreading any lies Jim. I think what "new" seasons are adapted in a state should reflect what all the sportsman of that state want, not 3600 out of all of them as the case in ky. We have a fair season for crossbow hunters in Ky now. If they want to hunt the bow season there is nothing stopping them from doing so, if they are handicapped they can get a permit to use a crossbow all season. That is the way it should be imo. No bigotry. There is a lot of passion involved for each weapon, there is nothing wrong with either side defending what is true and known. I just don't think the bow side causes all the division and fighting that they are blamed for, but some how everyone of their points is always pointed at as greed or lies by your side.



we don't need new seasons-we just need to get rid of stupid limitations on what is archery tackle


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> we don't need new seasons-we just need to get rid of stupid limitations on what is archery tackle


No , you want to get rid of regulations set in place for your own personal reasons. Call them stupid if you will , but they are regulations of deer seasons ,not limitations on what archery tackel is .:zip: http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/301/002/172.htm


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> No , you want to get rid of regulations set in place for your own personal reasons. Call them stupid if you will , but they are regulations of deer seasons ,not limitations on what archery tackel is .:zip: http://www.lrc.state.ky.us/kar/301/002/172.htm



LOL-all you have is sophistry and semantics
they are stupid and they are regulations of archery tackle since they divide bows. What are you going to have when those stupid divisions melt away? 
SHouting doesn't make a weak argument any stronger.


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> wrong again-if there are quotas it means that more people want to bowhunt
> 
> nothing more nothing less
> 
> furthermore if quotas were needed due to xbows that means xbows had increased the number of bowhunters


Wrong again. It just means that rifle hunters aren't satisfied with their liberal seasons, and want to hunt the entire season without having to use a bow.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> Wrong again. It just means that rifle hunters aren't satisfied with their liberal seasons, and want to hunt the entire season without having to use a bow.



this is primo stupidity on several fronts

1) its a bow-even the KY regulations call it a bow

2) liberal rifle seasons-which state are we talking about PM?

3) why your concern as to what type of bow someone uses


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> LOL-all you have is sophistry and semantics
> they are stupid and they are regulations of archery tackle since they divide bows. What are you going to have when those stupid divisions melt away?
> SHouting doesn't make a weak argument any stronger.


 Its the law sorry you don't like it Jim. If you want to hunt in Ky , just go by the regs and you will have no problem Jim  I am not worried and could care less.:teeth:


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Its the law sorry you don't like it Jim. If you want to hunt in Ky , just go by the regs and you will have no problem Jim  I am not worried and could care less.:teeth:



you confuse saying what the l aw is and whether the law makes sense
No one advocates breaking a stupid law-merely changing it


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> you confuse saying what the l aw is and whether the law makes sense
> No one advocates breaking a stupid law-merely changing it


 The law makes perfectly good sense  . We know how to handle what you speak of , its been done twice


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> The law makes perfectly good sense  . We know how to handle what you speak of , its been done twice


ah a statist. an interesting position that will leave you helpless to complain when the law changes


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> ah a statist. an interesting position that will leave you helpless to complain when the law changes


 Call me what you want Jim. Did I say anything negative about the changes we got this year.... no. I think crossbower's have a fair season. Hold on to that thought about when it changes. 

Why do you have so much interest in Ky? Is it the fact that we are ahead in b & c entries compared to Ohio? Considering the fact that ky's modern gun season is during the rut thats is impressive don't ya think.

When is ohio's modern gun season? If its not during the rut I wonder why Ohio is falling behind ky. Have any ideas Jim?


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> this is primo stupidity on several fronts
> 
> 1) its a bow-even the KY regulations call it a bow
> 
> 2) liberal rifle seasons-which state are we talking about PM?
> 
> 3) why your concern as to what type of bow someone uses


You can call my dog a cat-doesn't make it true.
I don't care what type of bow is used, as long as it is not held in a drawn position by artificial means, which is why I oppose the draw-lock on compounds. If crossbows were drawn by the hunter and held there by the hunter, I would not oppose their introduction into archery season.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> You can call my dog a cat-doesn't make it true.
> I don't care what type of bow is used, as long as it is not held in a drawn position by artificial means, which is why I oppose the draw-lock on compounds. If crossbows were drawn by the hunter and held there by the hunter, I would not oppose their introduction into archery season.



that is really stupid and you know it


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> that is really stupid and you know it



Jim, just because one can't follow something doesn't make it stupid. You know, it's really ok to concede points from time to time. When you don't, your credibility crumbles.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> Jim, just because one can't follow something doesn't make it stupid. You know, it's really ok to concede points from time to time. When you don't, your credibility crumbles.



its as stupid as someone saying they aren't against compound bows as long as the hunter holds the weight at its peak point rather than utilizing the letoff


----------



## PMantle

Jim C said:


> its as stupid as someone saying they aren't against compound bows as long as the hunter holds the weight at its peak point rather than utilizing the letoff


 Most people do what they can to avoid advertising their lack of understanding. You could not advertise it better if you paid someone.


----------



## Jim C

PMantle said:


> Most people do what they can to avoid advertising their lack of understanding. You could not advertise it better if you paid someone.



I was thinking the same thing about someone who thinks xbows ought to be cocked in the presence of deer


----------



## aceoky

draw&release said:


> The TRUTH
> 
> (pay attention EVERYONE, truth backs up truth and should mean something to everyone)
> 
> These numbers aceo gives are for the SPRING season results,
> 
> NO surprise there, I stated them as such? something no one has been concerned with over the xbow issue because the xbow has been a legal weapon for spring hunting...no expansion, nothing new. The concern is over the fall season...something that hasn`t happened yet.
> And based upon NO facts, just unfounded fears.....wonder why in your "truth" you left out that fact as well as that few actually HUNT turkey in the fall, IF one "happens along", and they have a tag, sure they'll likely shoot.....the experts say the* fall harvest *could easily *triple* with NO harm to the flocks.....so much for the "truth" .....
> 
> 
> Will the xbow have a negative impact on the turkey numbers? We don`t know yet, we`ll just have to wait and see.NOT exactly true now is it? Considering the fall gun seasons have NOT taken much of a toll, NO good reason to expect the cb would either, more "smoke and mirros" about "concern for the resources" As IF some know more than the wildlife biolgists paid and trained in this area.....sad really
> 
> Funny you should even bother to mention this aceo, knowing that the spring season has nothing to do with with the resources concerns over the xbow issue.
> I don't "buy" that "concern for the resources stuff, it's simply NOT based upon any known facts or data.....it Is and "excuse" to oppose something that otherwise there is nothing to use , and that is all it is; imho
> 
> 
> 
> You might as well go ahead and post up the harvest numbers for the last few years for the deer too because no expansion had happened then either and maybe it will help your cause to show some more "proof" that there`s no need for concern for the resources. Nice try aceo but your "proof" is not proof of anything!


No I didn't get the "axe".....

That's "funny" , but has NO basis in facts at all! Turkey hunting(as most everyone *knows*; IS A SPRING sport in KY! Maxcam, has made several posts on the spring numbers and projected this spring's harvest would be WAY down.....(to only mention one btw)....

MOST everyone* knows* that the vast majority of FALL birds killed are birds of opportuninty(they show up while one is deer hunting, tags in hand dead bird).......NOW I could post up the fall harvest numbers and compare them to the spring....but I will NOT embarrass you with that, (not yet anyway) :cocktail: 

Thus, what IS "funny" IS that some would try to make anyone beleive the fall cb turkey harvest could be a problem, last time I checked before this "compromise", WE had added fall GUN days and increased FALL harvest limits...because it(fall harvest) was a "non-factor"????????? NOW I have to wonder on what FACTS is this "concern for the resources then based"????

Nice try...but "no cigar".......no facts......nothing........the majority of Ky turkeys ARE killed in the SPRING .......period.....who could you be hoping to "fool" with this......thus IF the numbers *I* posted are not relevent the fall harvest most certainly is not either.....period

With the new rules in place, I'll state this for Ky Mustang......funny how you guys were SO concerned with the HOW of things were done in the start, but NOW the "how" doesn't matter so long as the expansion didn't take place, OR that the (6) NEW bow clubs formed to VOTE, for Ronnie and against the expansion (and the who of formed them leaves NO specualtion, plus it's not being denied that I am aware of either)......guess "how" only matters when it doesn't agree with your particular stance? 

It should matter all of the time and on all issues, in our state....period........which is why *I* fought so hard (as you well know) for a compromise all along.....I agreed the "how" could have been done better and likely more "fair" to all..........I've NEVER changed that stance, yet NOW it's "fine" that the pro side was not at the compromise meeting? Even though Ronnie(president of the LKS) was there, participating and the UCBK IS a member of the LKS????????

I find it very damaging to all of us in KY that some would state their reasons that they opposed this because of the how, but would then support the LIES spouted on Strader's radio show, plus the "end results' of the "compromise" simply because it's "more inline" with what they want?????(plus all of the many other things that have occured; none of them "fair" to anyone.......including those who oppose the expansion.....in time you'll all find out what cost "winning" has placed upon us all in KY!)

Right is "right" no matter which side of an issue one stands on.......IF it wasn't done "right" the first time, it most certainly wasn't the last two times!!!!

NO one can deny that fact....

You (Ky mustang)mentioned the 3600, but failed to mention all the LKS members who voted for support, why??? 

This IS the legislation forum, and what has occured in the past several months in KY on this "social issue", has without doubt caused much problems and troubles for us all, do you think it was all "worth it", over this issue??

FR, I stated in the beginning, IF all was going to be the "same ole same", I'm not interested, I have yet to see anything "new" or relevent, as to why the compound should be allowed, and not the cb.....thus I've not responded before now(and likely won't again for some time)........

At any rate, the "tactics" used in the great state of KY by the anti-expansion crowd were like using a nuclear weapon on a rat, and I have NO doubt the "fallout" from doing so will be long lasting and very serious for all of us, regardless of which side of this one issue we stand!

I don't think it was worth half of it for this one issue(and as you know WE agree on most issues, apart from this one).......they will all now be affected, Ballard can feel free to pat himself on the back for sb211, we'll see how many join him in the coming years!

We DID get an expansion, and against some very strong(but minority opposition...using stupid and dangerous tactics imho)......

I can live with that season, and for the present time being, am trying to be very happy with that.......thus there is no real need in my "fighting" for expansion any longer .......at least not for the present time......simple really?:darkbeer: 

I've fought for this for others , that they who may not archery hunt NOW could join in something I happen to love and care about, I don't use one(a cb), never have, won't say I never will(who knows the future?):wink: but have no intention of doing so, sometimes doing what one feels is "right" and for the right reasons and in the RIGHT ways, IS important to some of us, at least.....

WE have that, WE never went "outside of established limits" nor did anything close to what those who don't want to share what is not even theirs to decide over, and in the end what is "right" for the majority of Ky hunters WILL prevail, I've never had any doubt of that......and I have no reason to have any now fwiw


----------



## aceoky

And THAT is the whole purpose of this thread, and my pointing out and documenting exactly what happened here in KY! 

Anyone who is fortunate enough to NOT have to have the politicians make game seasons and limits, weapons usage etc. on their own(as in Ky or was at least, only time will now "tell the tale" of how much damage has been done).... 

Perhaps they can work together rather than making the major mistakes some made here on a simple and "social issue", that HAD they only worked on a compromise(which in the end they ended up with anyway).....and avoided the "other avenues" they wrongly pursued, at a very possible great cost to ALL in Ky.....including the many who don't give a "whit" either way on cb expansion....

The lawyer who worked SO hard on the Cornell survey to try to find faults with it could NOT find them, the best he could do was "specualte" on "what if" and "why" but had 0 proof of anything he wanted to find, why? It was a fair and just survey, and the 3600 RANDOM surveyed ARE statistically valid and there response would be the same had there ben 36,000 or more surveyed, WE got experts to check on that and it's a FACT!

NO ONE "samples" everyone in any group to determine any outcome(and IF they were that foolish with their funds, it would not be a "sample" anyway) :darkbeer: 

The most "funny" thing to *me* is; from all of this mess, that those who say the majority is opposed to this can't produce ANY proof of that, but yet still like to try to find non-existant problems with the surveys and LKS membership votes all of which prove beyond doubt what is wanted......"odd" to me at least.......IF so many were in fact opposed as they maintain even now, you'd expect some proof.......

What "lesson" is to be learned from this entire mess in KY?

I think, the outcome of the compromise(which many of us, including myself worked long and hard on, for many, many months, but always rejected but never for any good reason(s)......) IS the "lesson", had the other side, been eager to end this division and all the other things we would have never gotten to this point here in Ky, where I can say without doubt this will never be over for many on both sides, no matter any future outcome, that's sad and should not have been allowed to progress, by the "bow groups" that refused to even try to work this out in a civil and speedy manner....

I can only hope that as others will without doubt be soon faced with similar situations they will learn from what has been posted here, and not make the same mistakes, IF that does indeed happen, I have not wasted the time it's taken to compile the facts on all of this.....and present them, as I've done.......

THAT is my sincere hope.......whether it actually takes place is yet to be seen and realized, but I have some hopes that others can and will learn from the many mistakes(on both sides , I'll add), in this whole CB expansion "mess" in Ky


----------



## KY MUSTANG

> You (Ky mustang)mentioned the 3600, but failed to mention all the LKS members who voted for support, why??
> I guess you are going to claim 100% in favor? don't think so bud, but you are going to roll back to your scientific survey right. Do you believe in evolution? Most scientist do  Tell us how many members were for and how many against
> 
> This IS the legislation forum, and what has occured in the past several months in KY on this "social issue", has without doubt caused much problems and troubles for us all, do you think it was all "worth it", over this issue??
> Who caused this division? There is no way the legislation can not be involved to some extent. So you think this is the first time legislation has been involved in hunting seasons. It got the mess settled so yes it was worth it


 If you think 3600 opions out of 200,000 + is accurate thats your own misfortune, but I am going to guess those legislators payed attention to the # of calls, e mails they got. Carry on Ace. Its over


----------



## Free Range

Ace glad to see you are back from your time out 
One more and you will be tied with me. :wink: 

Just as a show of good will I will point out there are new rules here, and you just violated them, be careful, I wouldn't want to see you banned for good. :cocktail:


----------



## willie

KY MUSTANG said:


> ..............Its over


Nope...

It is never "over"..

See you next year and if necessary the year after, etc.......






.


----------



## Free Range

> Nope...
> 
> It is never "over"..
> 
> See you next year and if necessary the year after, etc.......


ANd they wonder why we don't want any compromise   :darkbeer: :darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

Yup - give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile.

It wouldn't be so obnoxious if they didn't claim to be bowhunters ....LOL.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

willie said:


> Nope...
> 
> It is never "over"..
> 
> See you next year and if necessary the year after, etc.......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


thats funny Willie , bring it on, you roll the dice you pay the price. Do you guys realize how many new bow groups this has caused to form


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Yup - give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile.
> 
> It wouldn't be so obnoxious if they didn't claim to be bowhunters ....LOL.



I have a great idea Source-you hunt with the bow you want and call yourself a bowhunter and stop obsessing and feeling a need to define other bowhunters based on what sort of bow they use


----------



## JDMiller

KY MUSTANG said:


> thats funny Willie , bring it on, you roll the dice you pay the price. Do you guys realize how many new bow groups this has caused to form



There was only 6 new clubs..... 5 were archery the other was a kennel club. All in all .....I hope these clubs do well & more are added. The more people involved only makes our sport stronger. However if you look at the overall picture ....including the KBA & UBK....and all the bow clubs across the state......total memberhip would not make up a 1000 people. I will also add that not all of that membership is against expansion or crossbows in general. Differing opinions within those groups is what made compromise discussions in the beginning dificult. It was more or less a forced hand by the legislators to bring this to a head and the result was the compromise we have now. 

Overall ......who won the battle?? The crossbow season has went from the traditional 9 day season to 77 days a crossbow can be used to hunt deer or turkey. 55 plus of those days were days we could'nt use a crossbow before. Now the season is finalized for 2006 ....... I've noticed lots of advertising from sporting good dealers with crossbows now in stock. Fact being I'm hearing sales are starting to pick up. As we get through this season.....we will begin establishing harvest data on the overall effect & impact that raised concern from many. The survey performed by Cornell was never disproven and as the KDF&WR has stated......it will be used for management decisions for years to come. In reality..... theres only three weeks that are in question that will resolve this issue completly.

So..... Did a hardlined stance of no crossbows in archery season prevail......the answer is NO. Support will continue to grow and acceptance will be garnered....that is inevitable. The division on this issue will faulter and a better understanding will continue. Those opposing laid all the cards on the table at once....soon there will be no question as to the concerns raised. In time there will be more growth..... could be next year or in five years...but it will happen. Its not over in Kentucky.....its just beginning. :wink:


----------



## KY MUSTANG

JDMiller said:


> There was only 6 new clubs..... 5 were archery the other was a kennel club. All in all .....I hope these clubs do well & more are added. The more people involved only makes our sport stronger. However if you look at the overall picture ....including the KBA & UBK....and all the bow clubs across the state......total memberhip would not make up a 1000 people. I will also add that not all of that membership is against expansion or crossbows in general. Differing opinions within those groups is what made compromise discussions in the beginning dificult. It was more or less a forced hand by the legislators to bring this to a head and the result was the compromise we have now.
> 
> Overall ......who won the battle?? The crossbow season has went from the traditional 9 day season to 77 days a crossbow can be used to hunt deer or turkey. 55 plus of those days were days we could'nt use a crossbow before. Now the season is finalized for 2006 ....... I've noticed lots of advertising from sporting good dealers with crossbows now in stock. Fact being I'm hearing sales are starting to pick up. As we get through this season.....we will begin establishing harvest data on the overall effect & impact that raised concern from many. The survey performed by Cornell was never disproven and as the KDF&WR has stated......it will be used for management decisions for years to come. In reality..... theres only three weeks that are in question that will resolve this issue completly.
> 
> So..... Did a hardlined stance of no crossbows in archery season prevail......the answer is NO. Support will continue to grow and acceptance will be garnered....that is inevitable. The division on this issue will faulter and a better understanding will continue. Those opposing laid all the cards on the table at once....soon there will be no question as to the concerns raised. In time there will be more growth..... could be next year or in five years...but it will happen. Its not over in Kentucky.....its just beginning. :wink:


 I believe one of your non - resident ucbk member was the first to start the we will be back argument, I was not even posting to him to begin with. How many members do you have? The hardlined stance got the results . I will ask you again yes or no ,was there an attempt to contact the ucbk to attend the compromise meeting? I never said I was against a compromise and I think you got a fair season.

As far as the survey Answer this for me Jd
http://www.kdfwr.state.ky.us/pdf/crossbowfinalreport.pdf
Among those surveyed (that were hunters) there were 14 counties at the top with the most amount of them hunting in these counties,

Logan,Hardin,Laurel,Carter,Lawerence,Pike,Christian,Ohio, Hart,Henery,Owen,Boone,Pulaski,Whitely.
According to http://fw.ky.gov/harvest/DeerByWeapon.asp The 2004 harvest records: there were 100 deer taken by crossbow in these 14 counties. 

The counties with the least amount of hunters of those surveyed by Cornell.Carlisle,Hickman,Fulton, Union,McClean, Simpson,Edmonson,Monroe,Clinton,Mercer,Bel, Harlan,Lee, Estill,Powell,Fleming,Jessamine,Woodford,Breathitte,Maggofin,Leslie,Owesely,Wolf.
Nicholas,Clark,Fayette,Robertson,Bourban,Montgomery,Mennifee,Boyle,Rockcastle
Would you believe those counties combined only had 84 crossbow kills.
I find that rather interesting how a random survey could come out that way espicially when comparing 14 counties to how many 
I also find it interesting why the exact # surveyed from each county was not on the survey, instead of a range for each county very interesting:secret:


----------



## JDMiller

KY MUSTANG said:


> I believe one of your non - resident ucbk member was the first to start the we will be back argument, I was not even posting to him to begin with. How many members do you have? The hardlined stance got the results . I will ask you again yes or no ,was there an attempt to contact the ucbk to attend the compromise meeting? I never said I was against a compromise and I think you got a fair season.
> 
> As far as the survey Answer this for me Jd
> http://www.kdfwr.state.ky.us/pdf/crossbowfinalreport.pdf
> Among those surveyed (that were hunters) there were 14 counties at the top with the most amount of them hunting in these counties,
> 
> Logan,Hardin,Laurel,Carter,Lawerence,Pike,Christian,Ohio, Hart,Henery,Owen,Boone,Pulaski,Whitely.
> According to http://fw.ky.gov/harvest/DeerByWeapon.asp The 2004 harvest records: there were 100 deer taken by crossbow in these 14 counties.
> 
> The counties with the least amount of hunters of those surveyed by Cornell.Carlisle,Hickman,Fulton, Union,McClean, Simpson,Edmonson,Monroe,Clinton,Mercer,Bel, Harlan,Lee, Estill,Powell,Fleming,Jessamine,Woodford,Breathitte,Maggofin,Leslie,Owesely,Wolf.
> Nicholas,Clark,Fayette,Robertson,Bourban,Montgomery,Mennifee,Boyle,Rockcastle
> Would you believe those counties combined only had 84 crossbow kills.
> I find that rather interesting how a random survey could come out that way espicially when comparing 14 counties to how many
> I also find it interesting why the exact # surveyed from each county was not on the survey, instead of a range for each county very interesting:secret:


Ky Mustang...... I'll answer your questions the best I can. 

As far as Willie's statements ....he's a grown man and can very well back up his statements ....but his opinion is the same as mine. It's not over and its not going away anytime soon. There is only one thing left to resolve this issue once & for all.....three weeks prior to modern gun. September & January is not in question. If we could come to agreement on these three weeks this issue would be finalized. Until then..... we will pursue it as long as it takes.

now your questions...... 

1. UCBK Membership = 30 plus members......25 are Ky. Residents.

2. Was there a attempt to contact the UCBK for the compromise meeting in March??? NO...... You can varify this with Lowebow (UBK-VP) & Gary Williams (KBA-Pres.)....we were not invited to the meeting. Fact being ....Ask them if the UCBK contacted them about two weeks prior to the agreement to discuss possible compromise discussions. We basically heard nothing back..... so we figured the groups were not willing to negotiate...so the talks ended. Both of these guys have my respect and I believe they would be willing to answer your questions concerning this. I just want to set the record straight.....the UCBK was not involved in any shape form or fashion...with the compromise. I will also add that it probably would not have made any difference. Considering the circumstances ....we were not in a position to negotiate ....it was this agreement or we would have had the same season we had for 2005.

In my opinion...... considering the division this has caused it would have been nice to been included. I also think it would have been a show of good faith but I'm well aware that our presence would have been just that....a presence. It was not our show....nor the KDF&WR. 

3. Survey.......This survey like any survey can be picked apart.......which is what many have done. All I can say is they asked 3600 people from a pool of people that bought resident combination license or landowners.....they asked the questions....the respondants gave the answers. The results were what they were. Cornell is highly respected for their survey work. They have performed surveys for other states concerning crossbows and it showed opposition. 

As far as the harvest numbers..... my guess what you reported may seem odd but its probably accurate. You know as well as I there are no accurate accounts of the number of actual crossbow users in Kentucky. Since we dont use a method specific tag system the only data we have is those that are successful and report it in as a crossbow kill to TeleCheck. 100 harvest in the top counties vs. 84 in the bottom counties is not off base in my opinion. Its been reported that the highest number of crossbow users are in the Eastern counties of the state....which are many on the bottom of the list. I really dont know why....that is except for the fact that the coal industry take its toll on the workers. Its been said that there are more people qualified for methods exemptions / existing crossbow users than any other area of the state.

Ky. Mustang..... in summary....I agree with a lot of your statements and you probably agree with some of mine. We just stand on the opposite side of the issue on this one. The circumstances surrounding this issue probably lays some blame on the supporters , opposition and the KDF&WR in the manner it was handled. There is a lot more to this than whats been posted on internet sites. At this point in time.....we have what we have and I expect more in the future. Time will be the deciding factor.....could be a year or five....your guess is as good as mine but its definitely going to be pushed for years to come. I will also say ....that considering what we had....its a fair compromise to gain more support.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

So then ....the UCBK will continue to drive the wedge to divide the sportsman of Ky in the future.


----------



## JDMiller

KY MUSTANG said:


> So then ....the UCBK will continue to drive the wedge to divide the sportsman of Ky in the future.


I never personally tried to drive any wedges but the UCBK will continue to promote crossbow use and advancement of the season. In my opinion there is not a whole lot left to do but let things run the course on its own. The opportunity has been provided...... its up to Kentucky hunters to use it.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Well I think the main opportunity problem for most is not having a place to hunt or quality place thats not crowded. What do you think?


----------



## JDMiller

KY MUSTANG said:


> Well I think the main opportunity problem for most is not having a place to hunt or quality place thats not crowded. What do you think?


Yes..... I agree. We have spent over a year debating the crossbow issue when there is more important issues needing attention. We as sportsmen let legislation slip through the cracks that would have allowed tax incentives to farmers / landowners to allow access for hunting their land. This was out there about the time SB211 and the cervid bill was getting all the attention. I'll admit I dont know all the particulars on this one but it was thinking outside the box..... In my opinion it was worthwhile to pursue it. 

Times have changed...... when I was a kid you could find access to ground pretty easy...... however we also did'nt have many deer or turkey on our end of the state. When the deer & turkey poulations began to boom ...... posted signs , leases ...and hunt clubs began poping up everywhere. It will not be very long ....if were not already there.....If you dont own hunting acreage or have it in the family..... get ready to spend big bucks to hunt. 

As far as the WMA's........ some get a lot of pressure some dont. I hear a lot about the ones near Louisville / Frankfort / Lexington being really pressured. The ones around us..... including LBL.... they get a lot of attention on opening weekend....but after that they calm down quite abit. Hopefully the KDF&WR will keep focusing on this issue and not drop the ball when large tracks of land become available. I will also add .....it takes money to do this. The KDF&WR receives no general fund tax dollars......their operation is soely based on being self-supporting from license & permit sales and other areas they generate money. More hunters = more revenue to get things done.

If we want to change things we have to allow some changes. The crossbow issue is not but a small blip on the radar when you think about the things that really have a impact. Recruitment & retention is key to enjoying things as we know it.


----------



## Silver Pine

Hooray for JDMiller and KY MUSTANG. I agree. Some states have passed "No loss of Hunting Land" laws that trade buildable property for unimproved land. Other states are buying more hunting property outright. Hunters who vote (or voters who hunt) should contact their state game agencys and make the case for buying more land for game conservation. More land would mean more licenses sold and more money for conservation employees, Duck Cops and breeding grounds. A couple of hundred acres here, a couple of hundred acres there..........purdy soon were talking first class hunting within an hours drive for almost every voter/hunter.

This is something we can all agree on and support (actively).

:cocktail: :cocktail: :cocktail: :cocktail: :cocktail:


----------



## ballard

JD - I agree with a lot of your points, and it was nice to meet you at the convention, by the way. I think the best thing all of us can do is wait and actually see what happens. Let's just give it some time. 

If xbows don't have any significant impact and more and more people begin to use them, then I'd anticipate that we'll see further expansion in the future.

Ace - Please leave me out of your rants. You reference me as being the "lawyer" who criticized the survey but couldn't prove anything was wrong with it. Now, you're entitled to think this was the greatest survey ever, but I will continue to believe that this survey was result-driven and self-serving. I also know first-hand a good number of Ky legislators who agreed with my assessment. You're entitled to your opinion, but I'd appreciate it if you'd leave me out of it. 

Also, please stop making claims about what the League of Kentucky Sportsmen ("LKS") wants. As you should be aware, one of your own UCBK officers, Tom Conely, presented a resolution at the annual LKS convention (which YOU did not even attend) for the LKS to support an even larger xbow season expansion. In case you hadn't heard, that proposal was overwhelmingly defeated (something like 140 against and 17 for). 

Seems a lot of folks on this board are fixated on either defining crossbows as bows/archery or arguing that they're actually more like guns. Do the semantics of labels really matter?


----------



## Free Range

What? Ace stretching the truth,,,,,can’t be, :darkbeer: 
wow 140 to 17 that’s got to hurt. ukey:


----------



## thesource

ballard said:


> Seems a lot of folks on this board are fixated on either defining crossbows as bows/archery or arguing that they're actually more like guns. Do the semantics of labels really matter?



If they are not bows, then they are not bowhunters, and obviously do not belong in bowseason.

Its more than just semantics .....


----------



## Jim C

ballard said:


> JD - I agree with a lot of your points, and it was nice to meet you at the convention, by the way. I think the best thing all of us can do is wait and actually see what happens. Let's just give it some time.
> 
> If xbows don't have any significant impact and more and more people begin to use them, then I'd anticipate that we'll see further expansion in the future.
> 
> Ace - Please leave me out of your rants. You reference me as being the "lawyer" who criticized the survey but couldn't prove anything was wrong with it. Now, you're entitled to think this was the greatest survey ever, but I will continue to believe that this survey was result-driven and self-serving. I also know first-hand a good number of Ky legislators who agreed with my assessment. You're entitled to your opinion, but I'd appreciate it if you'd leave me out of it.
> 
> Also, please stop making claims about what the League of Kentucky Sportsmen ("LKS") wants. As you should be aware, one of your own UCBK officers, Tom Conely, presented a resolution at the annual LKS convention (which YOU did not even attend) for the LKS to support an even larger xbow season expansion. In case you hadn't heard, that proposal was overwhelmingly defeated (something like 140 against and 17 for).
> 
> Seems a lot of folks on this board are fixated on either defining crossbows as bows/archery or arguing that they're actually more like guns. Do the semantics of labels really matter?



the antis use the argument they are not bows because that is an opinion-albeit silly-that cannot be completely destroyed with facts (even though-its silly). The next question is how does calling them a form of bow hurt the antis

you won't see a fact based answer to that


----------



## JDMiller

ballard said:


> JD - I agree with a lot of your points, and it was nice to meet you at the convention, by the way. I think the best thing all of us can do is wait and actually see what happens. Let's just give it some time.
> 
> If xbows don't have any significant impact and more and more people begin to use them, then I'd anticipate that we'll see further expansion in the future.


ballard... same here.....It was good to meet you as well. I appreciated the kindness and respect you gave me & my daughter. Its good to know that despite our different opinions on this subject....we can come to terms and understand each others views. Hopefully time will provide the answers to the concerns and we can approach this in a different light.


----------



## ballard

Jim C said:


> the antis use the argument they are not bows because that is an opinion-albeit silly-that cannot be completely destroyed with facts (even though-its silly). The next question is how does calling them a form of bow hurt the antis
> 
> you won't see a fact based answer to that


I don't disagree. By saying they are not "bows" and thus don't belong in the "archery season" really begs the question. On the flip side, people who say it's "archery" and therefore entitled to the exact same seasons as vertical bows also ignore the differences. Whether you call them "bows" or "archery" or "crossguns" or "hammers" or "shovels" really doesn't matter to me. At the end of the day, crossbows are just a different hunting tool, and their use should rise and fall on the merits of the weapon itself, its impact on the resources, and with due regard for public and social thought on the subject. 

I think there are several good arguments for expanding xbow opportunities. The reality is that xbows are not even remotely as effective as guns. However, I personally think its true that xbows are simply easier weapons to use and are more effective than vertical bows.

I also think that the various game departments are struggling with social and public perceptions, specifically the notion that the "archery tradition" (i.e vertical bow tradition) will suffer if xbows are provided identical opportunities. In your home state, for example, I'll bet the deer population and the number of total deer hunters has at least tripled since the 1970's when xbows were first introduced. Since the time, vertical archer numbers have stayed relatively stagnant (about 75,000 if memory serves), while xbows went from 0 to 120,000. On the other hand, the people who want xbows tend to completely dismiss the other side's desire to promote vertical archery. 

At the end of the day, neither side can ever prevail on these social perception issues, because there are, by definition, entirely subjective. If you progressively think that "traditions" evolve, then I'd guess you'd be all for xbow expansion and whatever other new weapon comes down the pike (so long as there is no adverse impact on the resources). In contrast, many folks aren't so willing to change and would rather maintain the "status quo" to pass along a "tradition" that they feel is positive and has benefitted them personally. 

In the end, I think that change will ultimately prevail. As recurves/longbows were displaced by compounds, I'd guess that xbows will displace compounds in the future. I think our society is generally geared to taking the easiest path of least resistance.

In Kentucky, I think KDFWR made a mistake by taking on too much, too fast. It was infinitely easier to allow compounds into the bow season (way back when), b/c there simply weren't enough stick bow hunters to stop it. That is not true today when we have probably 125,000 combined total vertical archers in our state. Had KDFWR transitioned the xbow season expansion in smaller chunks over a period of a few years, I doubt we would've had the all out war we've had. Hopefully, we can all learn from this in the future.


----------



## Cool Breeze

*In a Nutshell!*

I'm not going to take the time needed to read all of the posts on this thread but I would like to know in shortest terms what is this all about. If it is all concerning the use of a crossbow, it's a mute point at this time. The crossbow rules have been changed and like it or not thats what our Kentucky law makers have decided and it's going to be hard to change. The crossbow is not a firearm and is not archery even though the bullet is a short arrow. It should ideally have a season not usable before a muzzleloader or firearm season unless a handicap is evident and the appropriate license has been purchased. I am against the use of a crossbow in regular archery season and will advocate the banning of them as such whenever and wherever I can and hopefully the wildlife commissioners that make or change the laws whenever they think that more $$$ are involved will get the word.


----------



## Jim C

Cool Breeze said:


> I'm not going to take the time needed to read all of the posts on this thread but I would like to know in shortest terms what is this all about. If it is all concerning the use of a crossbow, it's a mute point at this time. The crossbow rules have been changed and like it or not thats what our Kentucky law makers have decided and it's going to be hard to change. The crossbow is not a firearm and is not archery even though the bullet is a short arrow. It should ideally have a season not usable before a muzzleloader or firearm season unless a handicap is evident and the appropriate license has been purchased. I am against the use of a crossbow in regular archery season and will advocate the banning of them as such whenever and wherever I can and hopefully the wildlife commissioners that make or change the laws whenever they think that more $$$ are involved will get the word.



I am curious-what are your credentials to claim its not archery given organizations with years in the sport say they are

I note I just returned from a seminar put on by the best archery coach in the world and he noted compound archery is an aiming sport (same as crossbows) will recurve archery is not


----------



## bowace

I hunt in KY a lot and I think the crossbow or crossgun rules are good. At least they don't want you to hunt with one for the first month of archery season. I think that if you use one you should be wearing the required amount of hunter orange. The organizations that JimC mentioned as recognizing them as archery gear didn't recognize them initally in the controversy but succumbed to the pressure from the industry. It was called marketing dollars, manufacturer dollars and license and hunter numbers dollars. Crossbows ukey: aren't archery and hopefully never will be, it's a shoulder fired weapon.


----------



## cynic

bowace said:


> I hunt in KY a lot and I think the crossbow or crossgun rules are good. At least they don't want you to hunt with one for the first month of archery season. I think that if you use one you should be wearing the required amount of hunter orange. The organizations that JimC mentioned as recognizing them as archery gear didn't recognize them initally in the controversy but succumbed to the pressure from the industry. It was called marketing dollars, manufacturer dollars and license and hunter numbers dollars. Crossbows ukey: aren't archery and hopefully never will be, it's a shoulder fired weapon.


And this brings us back to the original arguement of the compound inclusion in traditional archery season. Can some one explain how compound bows came into archery season in the beginning? If I'm not mistaken it has been said that the high letoff compounds used by hunters today are akin to the crossbow..


----------



## willie

bowace said:


> I hunt in KY a lot and I think the crossbow or crossgun rules are good. At least they don't want you to hunt with one for the first month of archery season. I think that if you use one you should be wearing the required amount of hunter orange. The organizations that JimC mentioned as recognizing them as archery gear didn't recognize them initally in the controversy but succumbed to the pressure from the industry. It was called marketing dollars, manufacturer dollars and license and hunter numbers dollars. Crossbows ukey: aren't archery and hopefully never will be, it's a shoulder fired weapon.


You are incorrect.

Several of the international archery organizations recognized crossbows as archery equipment even before there were archery seasons in most states at all.


----------



## Jim C

bowace said:


> I hunt in KY a lot and I think the crossbow or crossgun rules are good. At least they don't want you to hunt with one for the first month of archery season. I think that if you use one you should be wearing the required amount of hunter orange. The organizations that JimC mentioned as recognizing them as archery gear didn't recognize them initally in the controversy but succumbed to the pressure from the industry. It was called marketing dollars, manufacturer dollars and license and hunter numbers dollars. Crossbows ukey: aren't archery and hopefully never will be, it's a shoulder fired weapon.



Yeah back in *1947* when the NAA incorporated crossbows into their national target championships the huge money from Crossbows was the reason.

Atlantic city-one of the longest running major league indoor competitions-recently moved to Pittsburg (Stanislawski open) has had crossbows for decades.

Do these people actually think they can post this sort of stuff without getting called on it


----------



## Epinepherine

KY MUSTANG said:


> Why do you have so much interest in Ky? Is it the fact that we are ahead in b & c entries compared to Ohio? Considering the fact that ky's modern gun season is during the rut thats is impressive don't ya think.


What is has to do with crossbows, I'm not sure.

Pope & Young Club's 23rd recording period statisical summary, 2001-present:

Typical entries:
#1 Wisconsin
#2 Illinois
#3 Iowa
#4 Ohio
#5 Kansas

Non-Typical entries:
#1 Illnios
#2 Wisconsin
#3 Iowa
#4 Kansas
#5 Ohio

KY isn't in the top-10 in either. Doesn't anyone use bows in KY? Or is it just guns?


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Epinepherine said:


> What is has to do with crossbows, I'm not sure.
> 
> Pope & Young Club's 23rd recording period statisical summary, 2001-present:
> 
> Typical entries:
> #1 Wisconsin
> #2 Illinois
> #3 Iowa
> #4 Ohio
> #5 Kansas
> 
> Non-Typical entries:
> #1 Illnios
> #2 Wisconsin
> #3 Iowa
> #4 Kansas
> #5 Ohio
> 
> KY isn't in the top-10 in either. Doesn't anyone use bows in KY? Or is it just guns?


 If you will look back I said B & C :wink: post that info up along with weapons:wink:


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Ace glad to see you are back from your time out
> One more and you will be tied with me. :wink:
> 
> Just as a show of good will I will point out there are new rules here, and you just violated them, be careful, I wouldn't want to see you banned for good. :cocktail:


Nice try!

IF I have ever had a 'time out" anywhere, I'm not aware of it....fwiw

NO KY Mustang it wasn't 100% but then again, nothing requires 100% to 'win" does it now? :wink: 

You should already know the FACT the LKS membership AND BOD voted for full expansion by a majoirity, THAT is what matters, the fact the LKS president decided(with some help no doubt) to pay that NO attention speaks volumes about how far a few will go to get their way and to think they "won", when in fact imho we ALL have lost due to those very tactics, we'll soon see, IF I'm correct or not??? (sadly I'm guessing I am, and hoping I'm not)

It's only "over" for this year also......yep, it was done twice, but NOT by using established rules already in place, this "the end justifies the means" is a VERY dangerous ideal fwiw


----------



## spec

And some folks wonder why nobody fell for the "compromise".


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> JD - I agree with a lot of your points, and it was nice to meet you at the convention, by the way. I think the best thing all of us can do is wait and actually see what happens. Let's just give it some time.
> 
> If xbows don't have any significant impact and more and more people begin to use them, then I'd anticipate that we'll see further expansion in the future.
> 
> Ace - Please leave me out of your rants. You reference me as being the "lawyer" who criticized the survey but couldn't prove anything was wrong with it. Now, you're entitled to think this was the greatest survey ever, but I will continue to believe that this survey was result-driven and self-serving. I also know first-hand a good number of Ky legislators who agreed with my assessment. You're entitled to your opinion, but I'd appreciate it if you'd leave me out of it.
> 
> Also, please stop making claims about what the League of Kentucky Sportsmen ("LKS") wants. As you should be aware, one of your own UCBK officers, Tom Conely, presented a resolution at the annual LKS convention (which YOU did not even attend) for the LKS to support an even larger xbow season expansion. (wonder why YOU left out it was only a couple of weeks where it starts/stops/starts/stops again....NO good reason for it to do that except to add confusion for senior and junior hunters) In case you hadn't heard, that proposal was overwhelmingly defeated (something like 140 against and 17 for).
> 
> Seems a lot of folks on this board are fixated on either defining crossbows as bows/archery or arguing that they're actually more like guns. Do the semantics of labels really matter?


First, I NEVER mentioned you or your name, nor did I give you "credit" for many other things you've done on this matter(including YOUR part in sb 211, though I have and will now; great tactic counselor).... 

BTW DID YOU ever prove anything "funny" or "odd" on the survey, OR is what I posted true? WE both know it's true, so what is the problem, no one who didn't already know it was you, would have known had YOU not mentioned it here....btw

Also, I started this thread to inform exactly what transpired in KY 
YOU did in fact *try* to find faults in the survey, and last time we had this discussion over there, you admitted to finding nothing......so why bring it up now??? You couldn't find anything because there is nothing to find, Cornell would never risk thier very fine reputation for the likes of a KY crossbow survey, I tried to save you both the trouble and public "trial" of doing so, you didn't listen, so deal with the truth........


Secondly, I never tried to say what the LKS or anyone wanted or wants ONLY what the votes taken said,(and survey results) you are very well aware of that being fact, I trust.....also it's "funny" that on Kyhunting the poll the crossbow expansion(LKS version) WON in votes (can you explain that???) That was in the LKS forums for those who don't know....what IS "odd" is that suddenly it was defeated and by (at least in part) by NEW clubs just formed........hmmm

NO I was not there, I was in South Carolina attending my son-in-laws graduating from the Nave "A" school second in his class! (otherwise, I'd been there, make no mistake about it)......I place a huge importance on family, IF that troubles you, "oh well"....

And I hardly think the defeat of the proposal was anywhere near that much, again, was much closer to 50/50 as I understand it(from those who were there no less), btw . how did YOUR NEW club vote?? Strader's??? Doug's??? (there are six votes to our two just there fwiw)....

NO matter what you try to convince anyone of, the majority are either for full expansion or don't care either way, spinning doesn't change that, and in FACT the season has expanded, despite the best efforts of some to "have crossbows thrown under the bus to NEVER be visited again".......I can deal with that; can you??


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> And some folks wonder why nobody fell for the "compromise".


IS there a point to be made there????

Every single compromise offer made by the "pro-side" was in "good faith", not like this one, which was done in secret and "behind closed doors" leaving out the majority of the "pro-side", one is NOT the other, and can't be made to be or even to appear that way.....

Also, this one starts in Oct. then ends, re-opens.......but NO one wants to give a good reason, the pro-side asked that part be removed(making it open Oct 1, and continue through Dec. 31 just as it now does, without however starting then stopping only to start again AFTER the "pre-rut")...

And without any good reason(s) for it being done in this manner, bet we'll continue to seek that change, nothing "odd" there, AND it wouldn't even be "news" had WE been invited as we should have been to this one.....Maybe we'd have gotten the season without the on/off/on/off, maybe not, one thing is certain, we'll never know now, but we will continue to seek just that......the question IS why is that a "bad thing"???? Why wasn't THAT the season to begin with, why keep the cb out of the "pre-rut",(it's not out of the rut).........very "odd" as most will soon realize once people see what has taken place (and more importantly to many HOW it has taken place)

To KISS..........the pro-side was ALWAYS willing to compromise and as JD has stated he and the UCBK were trying to work on yet another one,but even though this "deal" was taking place, he was never informed of that fact.........one has to wonder "why"?????


----------



## spec

There is a point- you must have missed it. My bad for not knowing my audience better.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> Nice try!
> 
> IF I have ever had a 'time out" anywhere, I'm not aware of it....fwiw
> 
> NO KY Mustang it wasn't 100% but then again, nothing requires 100% to 'win" does it now? :wink:
> 
> You should already know the FACT the LKS membership AND BOD voted for full expansion by a majoirity, THAT is what matters, the fact the LKS president decided(with some help no doubt) to pay that NO attention speaks volumes about how far a few will go to get their way and to think they "won", when in fact imho we ALL have lost due to those very tactics, we'll soon see, IF I'm correct or not??? (sadly I'm guessing I am, and hoping I'm not)
> 
> It's only "over" for this year also......yep, it was done twice, but NOT by using established rules already in place, this "the end justifies the means" is a VERY dangerous ideal fwiw


Ace when are you going to realize if the Lks president would not have been on your side, the pro side would have gotten less. I just do not think the bow side was pullen for ya any . The LKS needs to boot your hiney because of all the bs you have spread on all the message boards
How did your federation vote on the Lks crossbow resolution?::zip:


----------



## Free Range

> Nice try!
> 
> IF I have ever had a 'time out" anywhere, I'm not aware of it....fwiw


You may or may not have, I’m just going by what a mod told me, now not saying you would lie, but I do believe them over you. 



> Every single compromise offer made by the "pro-side" was in "good faith",


Good faith???? Now that’s funny, you know as well as everyone here that any compromise reached is just a stepping stone for full expansion, and for you to even imply it isn’t, is a joke and shows your true character.


----------



## willie

Free Range said:


> Good faith???? Now that’s funny, you know as well as everyone here that any compromise reached is just a stepping stone for full expansion, and for you to even imply it isn’t, is a joke and shows your true character.


Not true at all and pure speculation on your part..

I *KNOW* that if it had been October 1st on that would have been it. 

The crossbow side was *MORE* than willing to give up the September hunt and the much a ballyhooed (by the other side) "velvet bucks".


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> You may or may not have, I’m just going by what a mod told me, now not saying you would lie, but I do believe them over you.
> 
> 
> 
> Good faith???? Now that’s funny, you know as well as everyone here that any compromise reached is just a stepping stone for full expansion, and for you to even imply it isn’t, is a joke and shows your true character.


there is no reason for not treating the two bows the same and yes full expansion is the only thing that makes sense


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> You may or may not have, I’m just going by what a mod told me, now not saying you would lie, but I do believe them over you.
> 
> Fine by me, agian, IF that is true I was and am not aware of it.... I have given myself many 'time outs", usually to take care of matters more pressing than these...but have never been "banned" anywhere that I'm aware of, believe what you wish fwiw.........it's "funny" though a mod would tell you and I wouldn't be aware of it?????
> 
> 
> 
> Good faith???? Now that’s funny, you know as well as everyone here that any compromise reached is just a stepping stone for full expansion, and for you to even imply it isn’t, is a joke and shows your true character.


As usual, you're not close to being correct, but what else would one expect? When the truth doesn't fit your agenda, you "spin" things your way(or TRY to do so )....WE never tried to get the whole season, OUR many attempts to compromise and save the $70,000+ PROVES that (the second survey expenses could have been avoided had the other side even tried to work WITH us on a real compromise period)

NOW, who knows??? IF we really want the full season in time we'll get it because and only because there is NO good reason for us not to do so ALL the data supports full expansion....Soon we'll have KY data that will support the exact same facts we now have from Ohio, Ga, Va, Tenn. to name only a few.....

That is the "problem" for your side, everything is on our side, you have nothing to aid in preventing the inclusion/expansion, just "feelings" and "but we want it for ourselves" , that won't "cut it" in the hunting market of today! More hunters and more opportunity without harm to the resources IS the "norm" and is why so many other states are doing the same, IOW we are winning.....and will continue to do so, because it's what's "right" for everyone, NOT a "select few" who feel they're "better" or "more deserving" than everyone else....

I do however HOPE that everyone can learn from the many mistakes, made in Ky on this "non-issue", and not go overboard on a simple choice of archery weapons during an open archery season, it's a dangerous path to go down, maybe we'll (in KY) survive it intact, maybe not, no one knows that just yet, we can only hope the damage done is not permanant, or too longl-lasting.....

Had half of the energy spent on this non-issue been spent on gaining more public hunting ground, working to gain more Conservation Officers , and many, many other needed things in Ky, WE as a state would have been MUCH better off, and I hardly think anyone can even begin to debate that......

Fact is; we had much bigger more important issues that should have been taken care of, but were not simply because of the expansion issue, among them, the KLEPF , the tax incentives for landowners who allow hunting on their properties, etc.etc.etc., WHY was the expansion fought so hard against to let these things "die" , I can't understand that at all, nor why some seem to care SO much what another archery hunter chooses to hunt with......much less HOW that can be more important than REAL issues that should have and could have been resolved for everyone's benefit.......

Some of these issues may never be resloved in a positive manner now, due to "hard feelings" both by opposing hunters and in the Ky Legislature, who didn't like being put into the middle of this one bit (and yes I have that in writing from several of them, not to mention some told me on the phone and in person, according to them, they won't soon forget this "mess", how can that be good for anyone in KY??)

Bottom line (at least imho) IS: it's better to try to work together and compromise, (and remarks by FR such as above NEVER help accomplish that btw), after it was all "said and done" and all the divisions , fights etc. WE still got an expansion, against some that vowed it would never happen (not this year not next never)......In fact we actually got more time than a couple of the compromises WE placed on  the table!!

Question is: WAS it really worth it over the expansion? Good people possibly forever divided over a simple choice of an archery weapon during archery season, which most know wouldn't and couldn't affect/effect their hunting in any way, shape or form???? Funny thing is; we agree on most every other thing, how did it ever get to this point??

I can only hope those who are going to encounter the same type issue can read this thread and learn from it, and perhaps see the working together avenue is much more productive than this "infighting", can or ever will be!


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> There is a point- you must have missed it. My bad for not knowing my audience better.


A bit "evasive".......to even try to imply that one is the same as the other(compromise) is insane.....also to do things in secret, leaving out a major player is again, asking for trouble, I'd have thought as wise as most of our iopponents are or think they are, they would have figured that out......guess not.....so much for your "point" imho


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> Ace when are you going to realize if the Lks president would not have been on your side, the pro side would have gotten less. I just do not think the bow side was pullen for ya any . The LKS needs to boot your hiney because of all the bs you have spread on all the message boards
> How did your federation vote on the Lks crossbow resolution?::zip:


Now I've heard it "all"!!

HE (Ronnie) didn't even tell us(the UCBK a dues paying member club of the LKS) the "compromise meetings" were taking place........the "kill sheet" he passed around most 12 yr old DEER HUNTERS would understand was "bogus" at best!! 

IF that sounds to you or anyone like he was "on our side", I guess you are entitled to beleive what you will, I however KNOW better! Had he been 100% honest on what the LKS membership AND BOD had voted on with everyone, NO way would have we gotten less! WHY didn't he, IF he was on our side? Why didn't he contact either JD or Tom C? Nice try , but I'm not buying it , not even close to doing so......Fact is, had he been "on our side" we'd have gotten Oct 1 - Dec 31 AND it would be OVER..........and HE knew it, but didn't push for the Resoloution????

BTW, calling an officer with FACTS is not going to get me "booted" either....and not ONE thing I've stated IS bs either.....I can easily prove it, Ronnie knows this, bet on that, why you don't , I can't understand, oh yeah, you're not even a member!!! :cocktail:


----------



## JDMiller

Free Range said:


> Good faith???? Now that’s funny, you know as well as everyone here that any compromise reached is just a stepping stone for full expansion, and for you to even imply it isn’t, is a joke and shows your true character.




I have to disagree to some extent to your statements here. The KDF&WR laid full expansion on the table. Honestly full expansion was understandable to the point methods exemptions would be done away with completly.... CO's would have one less thing to enforce. However a September start date was never non-negotiable. Crossbow supporters in all compromise discussions was either a Oct date or even a Nov. 1 start. 

September hunting in Kentucky is pretty much a hit or miss...... the weather .....90 degrees with a 100% humidity makes for rough hunting not to mention game care if you do score. I will admit the deer are easier to pattern and the opportunity to kill a buck still in velvet does exist.... a pretty short window to say the least. Otherwords..... A September start was never on the agenda for the pro-side... it only was on the KDF&WR because it would have been easier to have it run concurrent with general archery season. As far as I'm concerned it will not be pursued in the near future and that been the sentiment from the beginning.


----------



## aceoky

My response to Ballard as to why I was not present at the LKS convention should read:

United States Navy "A" school, where he graduated second in his class! (a rather large class btw, no small feat)

Sorry for the "typo"......my mistake.


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> First, I NEVER mentioned you or your name, nor did I give you "credit" for many other things you've done on this matter(including YOUR part in sb 211, though I have and will now; great tactic counselor)....
> 
> BTW DID YOU ever prove anything "funny" or "odd" on the survey, OR is what I posted true? WE both know it's true, so what is the problem, no one who didn't already know it was you, would have known had YOU not mentioned it here....btw
> 
> Also, I started this thread to inform exactly what transpired in KY
> YOU did in fact *try* to find faults in the survey, and last time we had this discussion over there, you admitted to finding nothing......so why bring it up now??? You couldn't find anything because there is nothing to find, Cornell would never risk thier very fine reputation for the likes of a KY crossbow survey, I tried to save you both the trouble and public "trial" of doing so, you didn't listen, so deal with the truth........
> 
> 
> Secondly, I never tried to say what the LKS or anyone wanted or wants ONLY what the votes taken said,(and survey results) you are very well aware of that being fact, I trust.....also it's "funny" that on Kyhunting the poll the crossbow expansion(LKS version) WON in votes (can you explain that???) That was in the LKS forums for those who don't know....what IS "odd" is that suddenly it was defeated and by (at least in part) by NEW clubs just formed........hmmm
> 
> NO I was not there, I was in South Carolina attending my son-in-laws graduating from the Nave "A" school second in his class! (otherwise, I'd been there, make no mistake about it)......I place a huge importance on family, IF that troubles you, "oh well"....
> 
> And I hardly think the defeat of the proposal was anywhere near that much, again, was much closer to 50/50 as I understand it(from those who were there no less), btw . how did YOUR NEW club vote?? Strader's??? Doug's??? (there are six votes to our two just there fwiw)....
> 
> NO matter what you try to convince anyone of, the majority are either for full expansion or don't care either way, spinning doesn't change that, and in FACT the season has expanded, despite the best efforts of some to "have crossbows thrown under the bus to NEVER be visited again".......I can deal with that; can you??


1. If you believe that the vote was 50/50 at the LKS Convention, you'd better watch the video for yourself or find a better source for your "FACTS". Here's the link: http://www.paintsville.org/Recreation/HuntingFishing/shows/KentuckyHunters/KyhuntersVideoList.html

The UCBK expansion resolution got beaten down so badly, they didn't even bother to count the votes. I was actually being generous when I said it was 17 for. 

2. You didn't mention me specifically by name, but you did refer to me as the "lawyer" who tried to find faults with the survey. Were you referring to somebody else? 

3. As for the survey, you also keep saying that nobody could find any flaws with it. That's false, and I wouldn't bother responding except I know that if I don't, you'll start spouting off your so-called "FACTS". Among others, here's a short list of the problems I had with this survey: (a) You keep calling it the Cornell survey. KDFWR wrote the questions and controlled the survey (by the explicit terms of the contract). Cornell administered it (i.e. they made the calls and tabulated the totals). (b) The survey questions were leading. People weren't given the ability to opine as to how much expansion they wanted. They didn't use the same questions that were asked in prior Cornell surveys; (c) The survey said that 10% of ALL KY deer hunters hunt with a xbow. That is absolute BS. Somehow, a whole lot of xbow people found their way into this survey. With only 500+ deer killed with a xbow in the entire state last year, how did they manage to find some 300+ xbow hunters to participate in this survey? 

I don't care whether you dislike me, ACE. If the people involved with SB 211 (which I was proudly a part of, by the way) were as vindictive as some others I know, the pro-xbowers would be *****ing about NO expansion. 

Stop whining and get ready for your expanded season.


----------



## aceoky

Fact is: Ronnie won and IS LKS President once again, and I sincerely wish him only the best, it's a tough job and one with little thanks, I admire anyone willing to take on that posistion and I have often said he did an excellent job his first term, and I honestly hope he looks back at that year, and uses it as a 'guide" for this year....

And for the record, I have nothing against him personally, but I will not apologize for saying he should have made the UCBK aware of the talks, whether an honest mistake or not, it was a serious mistake to exclude a dues paying club from talks which he was aware of, participating in, and knew affected US........no way to dispute that fact imho....

I also feel the LKS is "weakened" due to several commsision members(of the KDRWR) saying they won't work with the LKS as long as he's president, which I feel is a most serious issue,which must be resolved, whatever it takes from Ronnie for the good of the LKS as a whole......but that is my opinion, but shared by many......(though obviously not enough to change leadership )

It still amazes me after all this time this division is still here, and doesn't seem to be going away, too many seem to take everything "personally", when again most of us agree on most other issues and have in the past worked very well together.....it's a sad state for us at this point imho...

As for the KDFWR taking too much too soon, I'm not certain that' s very accurate, they've looked at this since 1999 doesn't seem to me to be a "rush", after doing their homework, seeing it wouldn't damage the resources, and would recruit and retain archery hunters, it seems a viable option, and I seriously doubt anyone expected it to come to any of this....."hindsight is 20/20" really fits here........

I'm with JimC here, what someone else hunts with bothers some people very badly, but there is no rational explanation for them feeling that way......and it's sad for all hunters; not so long ago, our enemies were the Anti-Hunters and the AR people, now our own is fighting against each other..........think about who that helps "in the end"....


----------



## aceoky

Ballard , I don't "dislike" you, I don't even know you!

Again, DID YOU find any PROOF of anything wrong with the survey(not what you listed above which btw isn't even "reasonable doubt", I checked with a couple of lawyers on those fwiw):tongue: 

I'm not "whining" at all, SB 211 is DEAD,that was "enough " for me and you know that fully well! 

Also that resoloution was NOT brought up by the UCBK, I'd expect your "FACTS" to be more clear considering......

I'll help you out........first it said 10% had EVER hunted with a crossbow (NOT they did now or even often)......also, WE (in KY) have the disabled permit, in case you've forgotten(or didn't realize it), the phone calls were made DURING THE DAYTIME hours.......would it be SO "out there" to expect a large majority of disabled people to be home during that time?? NO

And NO I was not speaking of anyone else besides you, however most wouldn't have known that except you jumped in and "took credit for it", thus you must be very proud of that fact, myself, Tom C. and several others are still waiting on your PROOF of the Cornell Survey being "fixed" or of anything Illigal done........you didn't find any PROOF, it's fine to admit that, but mere specualtions, allegations, and inuendo do not make YOU correct!! 

And to this point that is all you've had, but NO proof! Now I'd "guess" as hard and long as you looked, you'd found it IF it existed(that's a compliment btw):darkbeer: 

Bottom line, can WE work together on future issues or not Ballard???


----------



## Free Range

> only because there is NO good reason for us not to do so ALL the data supports full expansion....


Careful Ace, you are discussing the merits of the x-bow with that statement, and that is not allowed. 



> As usual, you're not close to being correct, but what else would one expect? When the truth doesn't fit your agenda, you "spin" things your way(or TRY to do so )....WE never tried to get the whole season, OUR many attempts to compromise and save the $70,000+ PROVES that (the second survey expenses could have been avoided had the other side even tried to work WITH us on a real compromise period)
> 
> NOW, who knows??? IF we really want the full season in time we'll get it because and only because there is NO good reason for us not to do so ALL the data supports full expansion....


In one breath you say, you are not after the whole season, and would have abided by any compromise, (you offered). And in the next spew your full expansionist stance. What are we to believe, when you can’t even stick with one position? 



> Had half of the energy spent on this non-issue been spent on gaining more public hunting ground, working to gain more Conservation Officers , and many, many other needed things in Ky, WE as a state would have been MUCH better off, and I hardly think anyone can even begin to debate that......


How correct you are, if you hadn’t pushed for legislation to admit the x-bow in archery season, ALL this energy could have been spent on those things. Really makes a guy sad, knowing this doesn’t it? 



> Bottom line (at least imho) IS: it's better to try to work together and compromise, (and remarks by FR such as above NEVER help accomplish that btw), after it was all "said and done" and all the divisions , fights etc. WE still got an expansion, against some that vowed it would never happen (not this year not next never)......In fact we actually got more time than a couple of the compromises WE placed on the table!!


And within hours, your side promised to continue pushing for full expansion. Now just who is causing the division? 



> By JD Miller
> As far as I'm concerned it will not be pursued in the near future and that been the sentiment from the beginning.


Then you sir are in the minority on your side, should I do the research for you and post all the post from Willie, and Ace and Bigbird and the rest stating their intentions?


----------



## Free Range

> (a)	You keep calling it the Cornell survey. KDFWR wrote the questions and controlled the survey (by the explicit terms of the contract). Cornell administered it (i.e. they made the calls and tabulated the totals).


OMG this can’t be true, Ace, is this true? All this time Ace has been,,,,, will miss leading us? Say it aint so.



> (b)	The survey questions were leading. People weren't given the ability to opine as to how much expansion they wanted. They didn't use the same questions that were asked in prior Cornell surveys;


Couldn’t be, a survey leading, gee how could that happen with such a respectable institution as Cornell involved. 



> (c)	The survey said that 10% of ALL KY deer hunters hunt with a xbow. That is absolute BS. Somehow, a whole lot of xbow people found their way into this survey. With only 500+ deer killed with a xbow in the entire state last year, how did they manage to find some 300+ xbow hunters to participate in this survey?


Again, how could this happen Ace, we are all waiting on your side of this one. 



> I'll help you out........first it said 10% had EVER hunted with a crossbow (NOT they did now or even often)......also, WE (in KY) have the disabled permit, in case you've forgotten(or didn't realize it), the phone calls were made DURING THE DAYTIME hours.......would it be SO "out there" to expect a large majority of disabled people to be home during that time?? NO



HMMMMM….. could be one of those ways of predicting the out come, don’t you think. 



> Survey being "fixed" or of anything Illigal done........



Oh now that he has answered you with some real concerns about the survey, now it’s “or Illegal” I don’t recall anyone saying the survey was illegal, maybe I missed it.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Careful Ace, you are discussing the merits of the x-bow with that statement, and that is not allowed.
> 
> Not even close to accurate, as usual
> 
> 
> 
> In one breath you say, you are not after the whole season, and would have abided by any compromise, (you offered). And in the next spew your full expansionist stance. What are we to believe, when you can’t even stick with one position?
> 
> That was "then" this is "now" big difference, also in HOW things were done......anyone can see that IF they only look...
> 
> 
> 
> How correct you are, if you hadn’t pushed for legislation to admit the x-bow in archery season, ALL this energy could have been spent on those things. Really makes a guy sad, knowing this doesn’t it?
> 
> Again not close to being correct or in the least accurate, stick to "out west" things you understand , then you can "keep up" (I Hope)
> 
> 
> 
> And within hours, your side promised to continue pushing for full expansion. Now just who is causing the division?
> 
> Again, you have NO clue as to what you're speaking, and again HAD they worked WITH us on the compromise we wouldn't be having this topic, it would have NEVER been needed, time to accept the fact that fighting expansion caused 100% of this division, the KDFWR set the season, they fought it 100% unwilling to compromise for over a year, that is a fact no one who has a clue can possibly dispute, WE didnt' work so hard trying to compromise, because we didn't want one, we did so because we were more than willing to work together, IF you insist on being involved at least keep the facts straight??
> 
> 
> 
> Then you sir are in the minority on your side, should I do the research for you and post all the post from Willie, and Ace and Bigbird and the rest stating their intentions?


It's a "habit" of yours to not care about truth or reality, to only "spin" things to try to suit your agenda, you again are so far "off base" it's not worth commenting on........IF YOU "think" this "thing" and the real compromises offered by our side are even CLOSE to the same thing, you obviously are too out of touch to continue in this, enjoy your silly opinions, I have niether the time nor the desire to continue to "educate" YOU on what IS and has taken place here, you can't seem to grasp a FAIR compromise proposal where ALL parties involved ARE in fact present and one done in secret where they are NOT...........'nuff said you can't it seems grasp the reality of anything when it doesn't fit your "agenda".....

JD IS an upstanding and honest person, and wouldn't have said it unless he means it, and as President of the UCBK, his opinion does in fact carry much wieght,a fact you also should have known by now, oh yeah, it again doesn't fit your agenda, so you don't care.......


----------



## Free Range

> JD IS an upstanding and honest person, and wouldn't have said it unless he means it, and as President of the UCBK, his opinion does in fact carry much wieght,a fact you also should have known by now, oh yeah, it again doesn't fit your agenda, so you don't care.......


Never said he wasn’t, I just said he is in the minority within his own group, you being one of the biggest ongoing pushers for full expansion. 

Please explain to us the points brought up by ballard, they are “REAL” and “DO” cast a shadow on your coveted survey.


----------



## aceoky

FR .......

......someone making *unfounded* claims, allegations and accusations does NOT prove anything, consider YOU can be sued by anyone at anytime for anything, does that make YOU guilty of something? NO , same thing here, he's "reaching" but has failed to prove any of it........YES that's right, nothing has ever been proven, I know how hard he's looked(and he's quite capable of finding IT IF it were there)........


Fact IS: the survey IS on the "up and up", OR he'd be tearing it apart IN COURT...........anyone who doesn't realize that fact doesn't want to know or care about the facts...........why didn't he?? Because there is NOthing there for him to "go with", mere speculations won't do it here and we all know that!

HE even went so far as to ask " why the KDFWR owned the survey results"(who paid $70,000+ for it to be done?? OH YEAH the KDFWR, WHO in their "right mind" spends that much $$$ and would NOT own the results??? NO ONE period).....simple to TRY to get some to doubt the results, who cares? Nothing........nadda has EVER been *proven* to dispute it, and NOT for a lack of trying, which to most proves that it's solid.......

I guess in your "logic" if a lawyer were to call into question YOUR charachter or that of the company YOU work for, then it must be true??? NO proof just the same thing as above??? Careful how quickly you assume things to be so factual.........could bite you back.....think about that.....


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Never said he wasn’t, I just said he is in the minority within his own group, *you being one of the biggest ongoing pushers for full expansion. *
> 
> That is simply not true or close to accurate, *I* was (and it's very well known here) one of the first to push for a compromise and continued to do so for the duration..........it's very easily confirmed do YOU ever get anything close to truth, without your "spin"?? I was and am for unity, most everyone KNOWS this,(including you), it's your kind who doesn't want unity, IF it means sharing what you don't even own!!! You are not fooling many if anyone.....bet on it!
> 
> Please explain to us the points brought up by ballard, they are “REAL” and “DO” cast a shadow on your coveted survey.


Only "REAL" to those who hope they are, not proven, not relevent,period, enjoy them IF you can, most know that there is nothing to these unfounded claims and accusations........guess you don't know that things not proven are not usually factual or truth??? But then again, I know much better than you what a great lawyer he is...........HE found nothing, thus, he's hleped to prove it's valid in many's minds........it's a shame you can't comprehend unfounded vs proven.......it's great though that most can!


----------



## aceoky

Quote:
I'll help you out........first it said 10% had _EVER hunted with a crossbow _(NOT they did now or even often)......also, WE (in KY) have the disabled permit, in case you've forgotten(or didn't realize it), the phone calls were made DURING THE DAYTIME hours.......would it be SO "out there" to expect a large majority of disabled people to be home during that time?? NO 



HMMMMM….. could be one of those ways of predicting the out come, don’t you think. 

Well, I guess it *"could be"* or maybe not??? 

Some may as easily contend that more non-hunting females would be at home and thus hurt the chances, lots of "maybes" , but NO real proof or facts, and since NO one knows how many permits exist in KY, HE has NO valid point.......period...most everyone IN KY knows this, obviously you don't "get it" once again........


----------



## aceoky

The expansion in Ky is what it "is", the sole purpose of this thread to to hope that others will learn from the many mistakes and divisions that have occured here due to the lack of willingness of some to work with other fellow hunters to work this thing out in a speedy and beneficial way,THAT is what IS important in my view........

I'm in fact happy with what we got , though I contend the on/off/on/off season WILL cause problems, and have to wonder IF that is the sole reason for doing it that way???

At any rate WE did not lose.......we won several days for those who choose to use a crossbow in KY.........I'm very , very glad of that fact!!

Crossbow sales are already picking up,(and I'll bet tags sales will as well)... which means more P-R funds are coming into KY; MY goal has ALWAYS been to do what *I* can to insure the majority of these addtional revenue funds are used to finance MORE Public Hunting Land for all of us! 

THAT ......IS the reason I asked Ballard the question on us working together, I can only hope we ALL can put things behind us, and NOT take any of this personal and do what IS best for ALL of us in KY.......


----------



## aceoky

*Free Range YOU said "How correct you are, if you hadn’t pushed for legislation to admit the x-bow in archery season, ALL this energy could have been spent on those things. Really makes a guy sad, knowing this doesn’t it? "*


It is simply amazing at your lack of understanding and credibilty!! 

First *I*(nor the UCBK NOR any other group) had ANYTHING to do with it, KY hunters had been asking the KDFWR(as is their very right to do btw) for crossbow expansion, since at least 1999! 

AFTER studying the effects/affects in 2002 they did a survey and found MOST were in favor or didn't care, so they(THE KDFWR) proposed the entire archery season to include crossbows as well...........

IT was the PRO BOW GROUPS, specifically the UBK and the KBA who "fought" them, and the majority, others later came on board, which would include myself , later the UCBK to "back " the KDFWR and the MAJORITY of Ky sportsmen/women who still say that's what they want!!!! Then a few others (including Ballard) joined the pro bow clubs, for various reasons and btw some of them had NOTHING to do with the crossbow expansion at all......(not going to explain that to you either, since you act as IF you know so much about it, you can figure that one out for yourself)...

It was NEVER the pro side that caused ANY division, in fact WE were the ONLY ones willing to try to work together for something everyone could "live with", it's a matter of public record in fact!!! There was a crossbow advisory panel even set up by the KDFWR to try to reach a compromise........NEVER happened......why? No matter what WE came up with , they refused , always saying "YOU'll get NOTHING, not this year, and not ever"........(guess they were very wrong, yep we "lost" dont' think so!)

IT was that very attitude that has gotten us to this point! And that is again the sole reason for my posting this thread to show everyone in other states what exactly DID take place here (in great detail no less), and hope they will avoid the same very costly mistakes.........instead of you even trying to realize this, YOU spin the truth and HOPE that someone would actually believe it was ME (or us) who did all this damage, anyone can read the start of this thread and see the facts and the truth of who DID do what and when in order.........IF they so choose, I have spent the time to "lay it out" exactly as it took place for all to see and understand........


So NO *I* nor any of the Pro side had nothing to do with this.......nor the division period......a very feeble try , no doubt from desperation, by one who knows they're "losing" the whole thing, surely by now they all can see they have no hope.......facts and data always "win" out over "feelings" and "mine, mine mine", and that's a "good thing" for all of us!!

The KDFWR had every right to listen to the hunters who wanted expansion, begged for it, when the research proved without ANY doubt the resources would not be in any way harmed, they went forward with it, agian, thier right and in fact their JOB.....to do so.........because a few made so much noise and division will never change any of the facts, it would be wise , to read and learn, rather than to TRY to spin facts to "suit your agenda" FR........

BTW, I'm hoping these feeble attempts at getting this thread locked also fail, I'd like those who really want to know the truth to be able to find it out, and an open thread obviously is viewed more than a locked one; so please keep it civil, I'll check on it sooner or later, but won't likely be in a "hurry" to do so........


----------



## Free Range

> First *I*(nor the UCBK NOR any other group) had ANYTHING to do with it,


For those to slow to keep up, if you are now on the x-bow side then you are part of the problem, no matter when you joined the band wagon. So when I say “you” I mean, those apposed to bow season, in favor of adding the x-bow. And you can say all you want, but you can’t avoid the fact that if “you” hadn’t pushed for expansion none of this would have happened, period end of discussion. You can say this or that about tactics, but it all comes back to those pushing for inclusion. I know it, you know it, and so does everyone else here.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> For those to slow to keep up, if you are now on the x-bow side then you are part of the problem, no matter when you joined the band wagon. So when I say “you” I mean, those apposed to bow season, in favor of adding the x-bow. And you can say all you want, but you can’t avoid the fact that if “you” hadn’t pushed for expansion none of this would have happened, period end of discussion. You can say this or that about tactics, but it all comes back to those pushing for inclusion. I know it, you know it, and so does everyone else here.


actually all the problems come from the selfish who continue to pretend that a compound and crossbow must be treated differently in the eyes of the law. The only opposition to properly treating archery tackle the same are usually compound hunters who are selfish


----------



## aceoky

:darkbeer: FR the "fantasy world" in which you reside is if nothing else amazing!

So again using your "logic" the compound shooters are just as responsible for this? They after all WERE the FIRST to do so (petition and fight to be included during archery season)........your "logic" if severely flawed to say the least........we all know this fact.....I know it, if you don't you're in a very small group for company.......

That above is "just too funny" to almost even respond to! 

Newsflash for you and anyone who even tries to believe that...............archery season does NOT belong to any group.........More and more states are PROVING that to the "bowhunters" who refuse to "share" what was NEVER theirs to begin to share!!!!! I know it's hard for you to accept FR but you're so wrong it's actually sad!

To you and a few more, the archery weapon of choice is more important than the hunt; the total experience, the "being out there",etc. etc.........lucky for us all it's NOT up to you and yours to decide, and the deicisons are being made and they are not in your favor!! (Even in KY)


----------



## Free Range

> Newsflash for you and anyone who even tries to believe that...............archery season does NOT belong to any group.........More and more states are PROVING that to the "bowhunters" who refuse to "share" what was NEVER theirs to begin to share!!!!! I know it's hard for you to accept FR but you're so wrong it's actually sad!



What is funny is your above statement, if it doesn’t belong to any one group then who does it belong to, gun hunters and bow hunters, how about ML hunters, or pistol hunters? 
Ace, you see the difference between you and I is, I believe bowhunting is special, I don’t hunt with a gun hardly anymore, and never for big game. I do believe bow season belongs to me, and to all the other bowhunters. And deep down I know you do to, it’s just that it is contrary to your posted position, so you can’t admit it in public. You go ahead and keep preaching bow season is not special, and how it doesn’t belong to bowhunters, get back to me in ten years and let us know how the “bow season” is going. Let us know how the public land hunting is going, and how the price of leasing ground is. It’s easy to be accepting and tolerant when you hunt on land you or your family owns. It’s a completely different story for the majority, who have to hunt public ground or shell out hard earned money to buy a lease. 

On another subject, tell us where you stand on internet hunting?


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> actually all the problems come from the selfish who continue to pretend that a compound and crossbow must be treated differently in the eyes of the law. The only opposition to properly treating archery tackle the same are usually compound hunters who are selfish


Exactly!!! And they have NO good reason for doing so, or for causing the divisions that have occured here, in fact a guy in Ky is "gloating" on how they used sb 211 to "FORCE" the KDFWR to "give in" just today!!!! Funny stuff! A stupid tactic in my view which I honestly expect to bite us all and sooner rather than later.......they don't care even if it does(according to them at least!!!).......THAT shows the truth of what we're up against here in Ky, some would risk everything for everyone just to say "we won"!!! 

So very sad....


----------



## Jim C

aceoky said:


> Exactly!!! And they have NO good reason for doing so, or for causing the divisions that have occured here, in fact a guy in Ky is "gloating" on how they used sb 211 to "FORCE" the KDFWR to "give in" just today!!!! Funny stuff! A stupid tactic in my view which I honestly expect to bite us all and sooner rather than later.......they don't care even if it does(according to them at least!!!).......THAT shows the truth of what we're up against here in Ky, some would risk everything for everyone just to say "we won"!!!
> 
> So very sad....


what gets me are the compound archers and their organizations who go ballistic over the fact that xbow advocates are doing EXACTLY what compound advocates did 30 years ago. The hypocrisy of these selfish groups is unbelievable since they try to impose burdens of proof on xbow advocates that they themselves could never have met


----------



## Silver Pine

_"Let us know how the public land hunting is going, and how the price of leasing ground is. It’s easy to be accepting and tolerant when you hunt on land you or your family owns. It’s a completely different story for the majority, who have to hunt public ground or shell out hard earned money to buy a lease. "_

Threads like this one and quotes like the one above have convinced me that the biggest reason a few hunters don't want crossbows legalized is because they don't want to feel over-crowded in the field. I don't have any problem sharing the woods with centerfires, rimfires, muzzle loaders, pistols, shotguns, stick bows, recurves, compounds or crossbows. IT'S ALL HUNTING AND IT'S ALL GOOD. I'm embarrassed for all the anti's fighting to keep a different type of "hunting tool" out of "their" season. Selfish and Greedy, plain and simple.

The public land in Kentucky belongs to citizens of KENTUCKY. The wild game in Kentucky belong to the citizens of KENTUCKY. They can do anything THEY want to with it.


----------



## aceoky

Silver Pine said:


> [I*]"Let us know how the public land hunting is going, and how the price of leasing ground is. It’s easy to be accepting and tolerant when you hunt on land you or your family owns. It’s a completely different story for the majority, who have to hunt public ground or shell out hard earned money to buy a lease. *"[/I]
> 
> Threads like this one and quotes like the one above have convinced me that the biggest reason a few hunters don't want crossbows legalized is because they don't want to feel over-crowded in the field. I don't have any problem sharing the woods with centerfires, rimfires, muzzle loaders, pistols, shotguns, stick bows, recurves, compounds or crossbows. IT'S ALL HUNTING AND IT'S ALL GOOD. I'm embarrassed for all the anti's fighting to keep a different type of "hunting tool" out of "their" season. Selfish and Greedy, plain and simple.
> 
> The public land in Kentucky belongs to citizens of KENTUCKY. The wild game in Kentucky belong to the citizens of KENTUCKY. They can do anything THEY want to with it.


That IS worse than many people may realize at "first glance".....

In KY, we have a ONE buck limit statewide......NO matter the weapon(s) used one buck, you're "done" with bucks.........now MOST zones in Ky also limit the total deer to a max of four(more in Zone 1 less in Zone 4)......THUS; IF one only buck hunts, they're done when they kill their buck (the majority of Ky hunters btw NO matter what season or weapon they used)...

NOW consider our archery season first part of Sept through the middle of Jan.....MOST would(or should) realize that MORE hunters spread out over a longer season does NOT equate to "more crowding" quite the opposite as most people work for a living and can't hunt ever single day.......the disabled who can already can use a crossbow and again NO one knows how many are doing this, there are NO records of this in Ky at all! So IF most continue to mainly buck hunt(not a good situation btw); once they kill thier buck they're done and "out of the woods", however since many archery hunters take doe, it's a "win - win" for everyone to get more archery hunters out there, spreading them out more so, crossbows will do just that; and that is the idea! And IMHO much better than adding more ML or gun days (which IS now being discussed so I'm told) More archery hunters in Ky is a 'good thing", and hard to dispute...

Just another lame attempt to "prove" a non-existant problem, which makes no sense for anyone familiar at all with Ky regs!!!

As for the "other concerns" WE already have high lease prices, and the CB had NOTHING to do with it, B&C bucks caused that, nice though that wasn't mentioned???


----------



## Free Range

> I don't have any problem sharing the woods with centerfires, rimfires, muzzle loaders, pistols, shotguns, stick bows, recurves, compounds or crossbows. IT'S ALL HUNTING AND IT'S ALL GOOD.


That’s fine for you to feel this way, but 90% of all hunters disagree, maybe more then that, feel there should be separate seasons. My guess would be you don’t hunt public land, or you don’t really bowhunt much, and use a gun as your primary hunting weapon. Nothing wrong with that it just shows the difference in attitudes about hunting between Bowhunters and those that want everyone in the field at the same time.




> As for the "other concerns" WE already have high lease prices, and the CB had NOTHING to do with it, B&C bucks caused that, nice though that wasn't mentioned???


Funny how someone that is suppose to be a bow hunter would use the term B&C instead of P&Y, showing your strips again Ace? 



> NOW consider our archery season first part of Sept through the middle of Jan.....MOST would(or should) realize that MORE hunters spread out over a longer season does NOT equate to "more crowding" quite the opposite as most people work for a living and can't hunt ever single day..... however since many archery hunters take doe, it's a "win - win" for everyone to get more archery hunters out there, spreading them out more so, crossbows will do just that;


How many does do archers take? How many does do gun hunters take? And adding more hunters to archery season will spread them out??? You are joking right?


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> That’s fine for you to feel this way, but 90% of all hunters disagree, maybe more then that, feel there should be separate seasons. My guess would be you don’t hunt public land, or you don’t really bowhunt much, and use a gun as your primary hunting weapon. Nothing wrong with that it just shows the difference in attitudes about hunting between Bowhunters and those that want everyone in the field at the same time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how someone that is suppose to be a bow hunter would use the term B&C instead of P&Y, showing your strips again Ace?
> 
> Once again showing what you don't know.....Ky is high on the B&C list NOT the P&Y and besides it's no secret that I have NO cares for them and their elitist club (P&Y) My stripes?? LOL I've taken far more deer with a bow than any gun including ML, when will you ever learn your "spin" is not helping you at all???
> 
> 
> 
> How many does do archers take? How many does do gun hunters take? And adding more hunters to archery season will spread them out??? You are joking right?


YOU look it up, and be prepared to be surprised,.....IF you're going to *try* to discuss a matter get some actual facts first OK?

Once again YOU have proven that you have NO clue as to anything on this matter , that you try to "spin", though it is entertaining to some, I have no doubt.......:cocktail:

The "good news" IS: now with the expansion the archery antlerless deer harvests will likley go "up" in numbers, in MOST zones and places that is a "good thing",another postive and reason why you and yours are losing .......


----------



## Free Range

Why would I be surprised that gun hunters take more does then archers?


----------



## Free Range

2005 total archery 11363
2005 total female 58442
So if all archery deer killed are does, then 46806 does were killed by gun, hardly a surprise. I think you should add more gun hunters if you want to take more does.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> 2005 total archery 11363
> 2005 total female 58442
> So if all archery deer killed are does, then 46806 does were killed by gun, hardly a surprise. I think you should add more gun hunters if you want to take more does.



MORE "misinformation" from FR what a surprise!  

Now PLEASE tell *everyoone* why YOU posted that information but didn't post the % of each??? 

Was it because it's something like 50/50% GUN and 70/30% ANTLERLESS ARCHERY??????

SO IF one wanted to harvest MORE antlerless deer, increasing archery hunter numbers makes perfect sense........sheesh Tim, when are you going to understand your "spin" won't fly nor win??? :wink: 

Easy for most to see and know why you'd leave that out (again it doesn't fit well in your "agenda") but IF you're going to post information, again, first please post a link so WE can all check your figures and also, don't leave out the information that you don't like, let each reader decide IF it's relelvent to them........fair enough???

I continue to prove inclusion/expansion IS a "good thing" and you have nothing.........to dispute it with other than biased opinions and "feelings".... NO way to dispute with a ONE buck limit, the woods won't be overcrowed (and in fact will very likely be less crowded, even during gun seasonS here because many will have killed what they want sooner than others,plus the TIME factor that you'd like to dismiss, but can't be since it's very REAL.....


----------



## Silver Pine

Free Range - _"90% of all hunters disagree, maybe (maybe???) more then that, feel there should be separate seasons." 

"My guess would be you don’t hunt public land," _(wrong!)

_"or you don’t really bowhunt much," _(wrong again!)

_"and use a gun as your primary hunting weapon." _(wow, your really not good at this guessing stuff!)

_"Nothing wrong with that it just shows the difference in attitudes about hunting between Bowhunters *and those that want everyone in the field at the same time*."_


Bingo. That's what it comes down to. Too many hunters already and the anti's don't want the competition. 

Contact your state wildlife agency, Senators, Commiteemen or whomever controls the cash and demand that your tax dollars and hunting fees be used to buy more land. State land, county land, parish land, city land. Anything that can be used for hunting. Get your buddies, archery clubs, poker pals, pen pals to call AND write. They don't make land any more - set it aside for our future, now.

Make yourself useful and HELP hunting.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

> Bingo. That's what it comes down to. Too many hunters already and the anti's don't want the competition.
> 
> Contact your state wildlife agency, Senators, Commiteemen or whomever controls the cash and demand that your tax dollars and hunting fees be used to buy more land. State land, county land, parish land, city land. Anything that can be used for hunting. Get your buddies, archery clubs, poker pals, pen pals to call AND write. They don't make land any more - set it aside for our future, now.
> 
> Make yourself useful and HELP hunting.


 The fact is on 24 of Ky's wma's last year the majority of the harvest was from bow hunters. These pro crossbow guys will tell you they do not give a rip about the sportsman that are forced to hunt public wma's. In fact most of them on here pushing the envelope have have an exclusion permit and it will not effect them either way.
They will also tell you if it effects the resource take away some of the firearm hunters season, but they want to claim the firearm hunters are on their side. That alone tells you a lot about the pro side. Ace and his cronies still want to continue to drive the wedge and cause division of the sportsman of Ky that says alot in itself about them on how they feel about all the sportsman of the state. They do not care about the people hunting crowded public ground, they only care about their crossbow agenda and that is fact!


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> The fact is on 24 of Ky's wma's last year the majority of the harvest was from bow hunters. These pro crossbow guys will tell you they do not give a rip about the sportsman that are forced to hunt public wma's. In fact most of them on here pushing the envelope have have an exclusion permit and it will not effect them either way.
> They will also tell you if it effects the resource take away some of the firearm hunters season, but they want to claim the firearm hunters are on their side. That alone tells you a lot about the pro side. Ace and his cronies still want to continue to drive the wedge and cause division of the sportsman of Ky that says alot in itself about them on how they feel about all the sportsman of the state. They do not care about the people hunting crowded public ground, they only care about their crossbow agenda and that is fact!



Interesting-you sure seem to act as if you know what xbow archers are thinking

in reality, the "agenda" of people like me is no different than the "agenda" compound archers had 30 years ago. there is no rational reason to treat two similar bows differently and nothing is more pathetic than watching compound hunters being bigoted towards crossbow archers


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> Interesting-you sure seem to act as if you know what xbow archers are thinking
> 
> in reality, the "agenda" of people like me is no different than the "agenda" compound archers had 30 years ago. there is no rational reason to treat two similar bows differently and nothing is more pathetic than watching compound hunters being bigoted towards crossbow archers


Jim, a 5 year old can see the difference in the 2 weapons(bow to crossbow) you are just going to have to get over that silly reasoning.

If a crossbow were not far easier to master ,why the exclusion for those that are not able to shoot a compound or long bow? The exclusion should be there for the handicapped not for those not willing to put in the time to shoot regular bows.

If you reason this with our other exclusion we should allow over weight people to hunt off of atv's because they get worn out walking to a hunting spot.:wink:


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> actually all the problems come from the selfish who continue to pretend that a compound and crossbow must be treated differently in the eyes of the law. The only opposition to properly treating archery tackle the same are usually compound hunters who are selfish


Pathetic.

More compound bashing from JimC.

There are MANY reasons that bowhunters are opposed to crossbows in bowseasons, you simply are too dim to acknowledge that.

The infamous KY survey itself showed that the biggest reason that bowhunters opposed crossbows in bowseason was that they "do not consider them to be bows."

Your continued misrepresentation of crossbow opponents position as pure greed is disgusting.

You probably should just shut up.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Jim, a 5 year old can see the difference in the 2 weapons(bow to crossbow) you are just going to have to get over that silly reasoning.
> 
> If a crossbow were not far easier to master ,why the exclusion for those that are not able to shoot a compound or long bow? The exclusion should be there for the handicapped not for those not willing to put in the time to shoot regular bows.
> 
> If you reason this with our other exclusion we should allow over weight people to hunt off of atv's because they get worn out walking to a hunting spot.:wink:



a five year old can see the difference between a finger released bare trad bow and a laser sighted mechanically released compound bow. The exclusion should be there for people not willing to put the time in to learn the finger loose and train to hold the full weight of the bow.

same argument
same stupidity
same attempt to exclude people over a false sense of sweat equity


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Pathetic.
> 
> More compound bashing from JimC.
> 
> There are MANY reasons that bowhunters are opposed to crossbows in bowseasons, you simply are too dim to acknowledge that.
> 
> The infamous KY survey itself showed that the biggest reason that bowhunters opposed crossbows in bowseason was that they "do not consider them to be bows."
> 
> Your continued misrepresentation of crossbow opponents position as pure greed is disgusting.
> 
> You probably should just shut up.



source-that violates the rules-its a personal insult. I think if we take a poll on archery talk as to "archery intelligence" between you and me you are going to get destroyed. I really don't care what greedy people call bows. When you can find someone who has any credibillity on this subject who supports you let me know but someone who claims the crossbow is not a bow will never have any credibility since its a lie. I own more compound bows than you do source and I have coached a former world record holder in compound source. Maybe you ought to ask him if I hate compound archers.

Your continued lack of knowledge on this subject is amusing as is the mental issues that drive it


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I can only hope we ALL can put things behind us, and NOT take any of this personal and do what IS best for ALL of us in KY.......


THIS CRACKS ME UP. COMING FROM A MAN WHO THREATENS TO SUE someone AND WANTS IT NOT TO BE "PERSONAL" AND PUT IT BEHIND THEM... COME ON. 

CAREFUL BALLAD. Not to be trusted.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I have coached a former world record holder in compound source. Maybe you ought to ask him if I hate compound archers.


I'm sure you love compound archers (and your world record holder, for all I know...lol), but you continually bash compound HUNTERS, which are all that matter on this issue. Stop slandering bowhunters, Jim - it makes you look like the south end of a horse.

Your continuing personal insults towards me and my mental stability make your whimpering and whining particularly humorous. Grow a set.


----------



## Free Range

> Easy for most to see and know why you'd leave that out (again it doesn't fit well in your "agenda") but IF you're going to post information, again, first please post a link so WE can all check your figures and also, don't leave out the information that you don't like, let each reader decide IF it's relelvent to them........fair enough???


You are a funny man, you told me to look it up, not offering any information yourself. I did, if you want to know where it came from you look it up, it took me all of five minutes, I would guess it should only take you 10 minutes. Percentages??? If you want to decrease does, you go with raw numbers not %, what would help more 100% of 1000 or 50% of 10,000? Not hard for thinking people to figure that one out, maybe that’s the reason you got confused. 



> I continue to prove inclusion/expansion IS a "good thing" and you have nothing.........


1)	no you haven’t, maybe only in your own mind, but not to thinking people.
2)	Careful, that statement is against the rules



> I think if we take a poll on archery talk as to "archery intelligence" between you and me you are going to get destroyed.


Of course we are talking about BOWHUNTING, in that arena, from what I have read here, Thesource would destroy you Jim, so would I and Marvin, and just about everybody that post here including Ace, willie, and the rest. You may be very knowledgeable in target archery, and we all acknowledge that, but I would suggest you stick to what you know, and stay out of HUNTING topics, because it’s clear you are less it that area, and keep getting the two confused.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> a five year old can see the difference between a finger released bare trad bow and a laser sighted mechanically released compound bow. The exclusion should be there for people not willing to put the time in to learn the finger loose and train to hold the full weight of the bow.
> 
> same argument
> same stupidity
> same attempt to exclude people over a false sense of sweat equity


 You really are confused aint ya. We are talking about hunting not target practice . Lets see duh the deal is long bows , compounds, and recurves are drawn just before the shot. Those targets do not run off if they catch you in the act but deer do. Like wise there should be and is seperate seasons in Ky. Your argument over compounds vs traditional bows is stupid and not relevant to this discussion.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I'm sure you love compound archers (and your world record holder, for all I know...lol), but you continually bash compound HUNTERS, which are all that matter on this issue. Stop slandering bowhunters, Jim - it makes you look like the south end of a horse.
> 
> Your continuing personal insults towards me and my mental stability make your whimpering and whining particularly humorous. Grow a set.


Until you can find someone on AT who can vouch for you being a hunter and having some knowledge of archery I will continue to see you as an anti hunting troll


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> You really are confused aint ya. We are talking about hunting not target practice . Lets see duh the deal is long bows , compounds, and recurves are drawn just before the shot. Those targets do not run off if they catch you in the act but deer do. Like wise there should be and is seperate seasons in Ky. Your argument over compounds vs traditional bows is stupid and not relevant to this discussion.


its funny seeing non archers bray about this. Deer run if they SEE you lift and aim a crossbow. Since you have NO CLUE about that fact I dismiss your braying as uninformed drivel

anyone who believes compounds and trad bows are so similar as to be in the same season but then claims crossbows should not be has no credibility and is a hypocrite


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> its funny seeing non archers bray about this. Deer run if they SEE you lift and aim a crossbow. Since you have NO CLUE about that fact I dismiss your braying as uninformed drivel
> 
> anyone who believes compounds and trad bows are so similar as to be in the same season but then claims crossbows should not be has no credibility and is a hypocrite


 What a stupid statement there is a lot more movement involved in drawing any bow whether it be compound or traditional , again any 5 year old could see the difference. You guys humor me you are completely out numbered here as far as people on this board that see things your way. It kinda reminds me of the Ky survey. Only survey the 3600 spoon fed names , but manage to survey so many crossbow hunters According to this http://fw.ky.gov/harvest/DeerByWeapon.asp ony 561 deer were taken by crossbow in 04. Yet they find 300 or so that are crossbow hunters when only surveying 300 or so from each district. Yea that sounds far fetched to me .


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> What a stupid statement there is a lot more movement involved in drawing any bow whether it be compound or traditional , again any 5 year old could see the difference. You guys humor me you are completely out numbered here as far as people on this board that see things your way. It kinda reminds me of the Ky survey. Only survey the 3600 spoon fed names , but manage to survey so many crossbow hunters According to this http://fw.ky.gov/harvest/DeerByWeapon.asp ony 561 deer were taken by crossbow in 04. Yet they find 300 or so that are crossbow hunters when only surveying 300 or so from each district. Yea that sounds far fetched to me .



losers always confuse quantity with quality. I don't care what bigoted ignorant people think. I have hunted with all kinds of bows and I know what BS people like you spew. You put all your selfish eggs in the "draw in the presence of game" basket because its the only colorable argument you have to serve as a pretext for the greed that really motivates your position. However, that draw in the presence of game is nonsense, we who have hunted with both bows know it and no credible study has ever demonstrated that the ALLEGED advantage that xbows supposedly enjoy have had ANY bottom line affect on harvest numbers

Even skilled archers can not hold a long bow at full draw for more than a minute while the same archer can easily hold a compound bow at full draw for SEVERAL MINUTES. Would you like to make a bet? do you think you can hold and maintain a lock on the X of a NFAA tournament target face at 20 yards with my crossbow (standing offhand position) longer than I can hold a legal in all 50 state weight compound bow?

You will LOSE. you have to raise and aim a crossbow at a deer. If it cannot see you do that, it won't see you draw a compound. I know dozens of hunters who have used the mechanical advantage of a compound to hold for several minutes as they saw a deer in the distance. YOu can't do that with a longbow.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> losers always confuse quantity with quality. I don't care what bigoted ignorant people think. I have hunted with all kinds of bows and I know what BS people like you spew. You put all your selfish eggs in the "draw in the presence of game" basket because its the only colorable argument you have to serve as a pretext for the greed that really motivates your position. However, that draw in the presence of game is nonsense, we who have hunted with both bows know it and no credible study has ever demonstrated that the ALLEGED advantage that xbows supposedly enjoy have had ANY bottom line affect on harvest numbers
> 
> Even skilled archers can not hold a long bow at full draw for more than a minute while the same archer can easily hold a compound bow at full draw for SEVERAL MINUTES. Would you like to make a bet? do you think you can hold and maintain a lock on the X of a NFAA tournament target face at 20 yards with my crossbow (standing offhand position) longer than I can hold a legal in all 50 state weight compound bow?
> 
> You will LOSE. you have to raise and aim a crossbow at a deer. If it cannot see you do that, it won't see you draw a compound. I know dozens of hunters who have used the mechanical advantage of a compound to hold for several minutes as they saw a deer in the distance. YOu can't do that with a longbow.


 This spin you keep posting about trad. bows vs compounds is not an issue in Ky Jim  ." If " the regs were changed I bet most bow hunters using compounds would pick up a traditional and go hunting and not cry like you guys are. Again your target practice has nothing to do with Ky regs and hunting . 
Now answer this if a compound is no harder to use than a crossbow why in the world are you wanting crossbows legalized:darkbeer: :zip: . Why are there restrictions for the handicaped to use crossbows? Why all the fuss Jim.
If the handicapped are worried they are being looked at as cheating I dont think that is an issue. I don't think anyone would look down on some one that is not able to use a compound or traditional bow for using a crossbow.
This expansion war is for people that are not willing to take the time to use a regular bow plain and simple.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> This spin you keep posting about trad. bows vs compounds is not an issue in Ky Jim  ." If " the regs were changed I bet most bow hunters using compounds would pick up a traditional and go hunting and not cry like you guys are. Again your target practice has nothing to do with Ky regs and hunting .
> Now answer this if a compound is no harder to use than a crossbow why in the world are you wanting crossbows legalized:darkbeer: :zip: . Why are there restrictions for the handicaped to use crossbows? Why all the fuss Jim.
> If the handicapped are worried they are being looked at as cheating I dont think that is an issue. I don't think anyone would look down on some one that is not able to use a compound or traditional bow for using a crossbow.
> This expansion war is for people that are not willing to take the time to use a regular bow plain and simple.


you clearly have no concept of what is involved. EASE OF USE is not relevant. Its efficiency that matters. You all want to impose time constraints to keep people out of "your" season for selfish reasons. You CONFUSE ease of use with efficiency. To a game manager or an objective person, its the efficiency and predicted harvest rate that counts in determining seasons. Ease of use means nothing 

however to the greedy, ease of use is key since ease of use allows more people to hunt. Crossbows are EASIER to use for NOVICES. They are no more efficient or "deadly" than compound bows. 

THere is no requirement people "take enough time" to learn how to use any bow and most of the bowhunting skills involve areas OTHER THAN SHOOTING (at least since compounds came along which allow people to be part time archers and still bowhunt).

Now tell me why ease of use matters without CONFUSING it with efficiency

by the way, your argument about <<This expansion war is for people that are not willing to take the time to use a regular bow plain and simple.>> was equally applicable to compound bows and that argument was dismissed as stupid 30 years ago. A compound bow is not a regular bow btw


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> The fact is on 24 of Ky's wma's last year the majority of the harvest was from bow hunters. These pro crossbow guys will tell you they do not give a rip about the sportsman that are forced to hunt public wma's. In fact most of them on here pushing the envelope have have an exclusion permit and it will not effect them either way.
> 
> 
> They will also tell you if it effects the resource take away some of the firearm hunters season, but they want to claim the firearm hunters are on their side. That alone tells you a lot about the pro side.
> 
> Ace and his cronies still want to continue to drive the wedge and cause division of the sportsman of Ky that says alot in itself about them on how they feel about all the sportsman of the state. They do not care about the people hunting crowded public ground, they only care about their crossbow agenda and that is fact!


It's amazing that you'd post such drivel! First I'm already in the process of doing what *I* can to use the additional P-R funding from the expansion $$$ to AQUIRE MORE PUBLIC LAND IN KY to hunt on.........exactly what are YOU doing(and the rest of those opposed)........ 

Secondly you're either confused or "spinning" and I really don't care which, guns DO in fact kill the majority of deer AND turkey, IF the resources were to become in any real danger, HOW would cutting back ANY archery season change that? It wouldn't.........simple to see, yet YOU want to say I'm advocating taking away from the gun hunters, which is not true and you know it!

IF you can't understand by stretching out MORE hunters over a LONGER season would NOT result in more crowding, you're simply not looking period...

For someone who's worked hard in my part of Ky for over 25 years for (among other things) the quail, grouse, deer, turkey and rabbits, it's absurd for you to attempt to speak for me, much less, accuse me of ONLY caring about one issue, shows what you don't KNOW.......MANY people around my area can attest to that, IF you're going to "speak" for me, a little fact and honesty would be very much appreciated..........thanks

Let's see, *I* fought hard for the compromise, from the start, I made it publicly known my hopes to use the additional P-R funds expansion WILL generate......... for MORE public land on which for ALL of Kentuckians to hunt ; which I KNOW you're aware, but you still come here and post that "stuff".......


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> You are a funny man, you told me to look it up, not offering any information yourself. I did, if you want to know where it came from you look it up, it took me all of five minutes, I would guess it should only take you 10 minutes. Percentages??? If you want to decrease does, you go with raw numbers not %, what would help more 100% of 1000 or 50% of 10,000? Not hard for thinking people to figure that one out, maybe that’s the reason you got confused.
> 
> SO "thinking people" would say that INCREASING the NUMBERS wouldn't change anything?? Yeah right.....Sure it would take ME (living here) twice as long as you to find information on harvests.....that's "funny"....Maybe the reason I get so confused is your "logic" is so flawed as to make NO sense to anyone(and I doubt to you as well)
> 
> 
> 
> 1)	no you haven’t, maybe only in your own mind, but not to thinking people.
> 
> so now YOU speak for all the thinking people, I'll give you credit, you certainly love yourself.
> 2)	Careful, that statement is against the rules
> Best you can do? First you answer it then try to get the thread locked......wouldn't want people to know the truth would you
> 
> 
> 
> Of course we are talking about BOWHUNTING, in that arena, from what I have read here, Thesource would destroy you Jim, so would I and Marvin, and just about everybody that post here including Ace, willie, and the rest. You may be very knowledgeable in target archery, and we all acknowledge that, but I would suggest you stick to what you know, and stay out of HUNTING topics, because it’s clear you are less it that area, and keep getting the two confused.


Yeah, you guys have really "destoryed" us..... 

Back to topic please; there ARE many valuable lessons to be learned contained in this thread.......


----------



## Free Range

> Let's see, *I* fought hard for the compromise, from the start, I made it publicly known my hopes to use the additional P-R funds expansion WILL generate......... for MORE public land on which for ALL of Kentuckians to hunt ; which I KNOW you're aware, but you still come here and post that "stuff".......


Tell us Ace, how much more P-R funds will be generated? How much more money has been generated in P-R funds in say Ohio? They have had the XB for some time now, surly you could tell us how much more money is coming into that state by way of P-R, or how about any of the more recent states, how much more money is flooding into those states? Or is this just more of your opinion?


----------



## Free Range

> Yeah, you guys have really "destoryed" us.....


Actually Ace, if you could read you would see I was saying you would destroy Jim in a contest about who knows more about hunting. See when you get your blinders on, and assume everything I write is against you, you miss-read simple things like that.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> It's amazing that you'd post such drivel! First I'm already in the process of doing what *I* can to use the additional P-R funding from the expansion $$$ to AQUIRE MORE PUBLIC LAND IN KY to hunt on.........exactly what are YOU doing(and the rest of those opposed)........
> 
> Secondly you're either confused or "spinning" and I really don't care which, guns DO in fact kill the majority of deer AND turkey, IF the resources were to become in any real danger, HOW would cutting back ANY archery season change that? It wouldn't.........simple to see, yet YOU want to say I'm advocating taking away from the gun hunters, which is not true and you know it!
> 
> IF you can't understand by stretching out MORE hunters over a LONGER season would NOT result in more crowding, you're simply not looking period...
> 
> For someone who's worked hard in my part of Ky for over 25 years for (among other things) the quail, grouse, deer, turkey and rabbits, it's absurd for you to attempt to speak for me, much less, accuse me of ONLY caring about one issue, shows what you don't KNOW.......MANY people around my area can attest to that, IF you're going to "speak" for me, a little fact and honesty would be very much appreciated..........thanks
> 
> Let's see, *I* fought hard for the compromise, from the start, I made it publicly known my hopes to use the additional P-R funds expansion WILL generate......... for MORE public land on which for ALL of Kentuckians to hunt ; which I KNOW you're aware, but you still come here and post that "stuff".......


That p-r needs to pay for that useless spoon fed survey that was done first:wink: .
So since we are talking about public land go check lbl's harvest. 
 In 2004 the bow harvest was 149, the firearm 37, in 2005 bow 87 firearm 39. Looks the other way around here don't it Ace


----------



## Marvin

KY MUSTANG said:


> That p-r needs to pay for that useless spoon fed survey that was done first:wink: .
> So since we are talking about public land go check lbl's harvest.
> In 2004 the bow harvest was 149, the firearm 37, in 2005 bow 87 firearm 39. Looks the other way around here don't it Ace


and the implosion continues..:tongue:


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Actually Ace, if you could read you would see I was saying you would destroy Jim in a contest about who knows more about hunting. See when you get your blinders on, and assume everything I write is against you, you miss-read simple things like that.


More nonsense from the well of nothingness. Source cannot destroy anyone since we have no proof he even hunts. I certainly know more about crossbow hunting than you and Source combined Free Range and that is why you and Source and Mr Ed get destroyed on this topic.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> you clearly have no concept of what is involved. EASE OF USE is not relevant. Its efficiency that matters. You all want to impose time constraints to keep people out of "your" season for selfish reasons. You CONFUSE ease of use with efficiency. To a game manager or an objective person, its the efficiency and predicted harvest rate that counts in determining seasons. Ease of use means nothing
> 
> however to the greedy, ease of use is key since ease of use allows more people to hunt. Crossbows are EASIER to use for NOVICES. They are no more efficient or "deadly" than compound bows.
> 
> THere is no requirement people "take enough time" to learn how to use any bow and most of the bowhunting skills involve areas OTHER THAN SHOOTING (at least since compounds came along which allow people to be part time archers and still bowhunt).
> 
> Now tell me why ease of use matters without CONFUSING it with efficiency
> 
> by the way, your argument about <<This expansion war is for people that are not willing to take the time to use a regular bow plain and simple.>> was equally applicable to compound bows and that argument was dismissed as stupid 30 years ago. A compound bow is not a regular bow btw


 What matters " dipstick" is they are different weapons, classified different by Ky state regs and have seperate seasons. This stuff you are posting is only valid in your class sessions and target practice not in the ky hunting guide:zip:


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Tell us Ace, how much more P-R funds will be generated? How much more money has been generated in P-R funds in say Ohio? They have had the XB for some time now, surly you could tell us how much more money is coming into that state by way of P-R, or how about any of the more recent states, how much more money is flooding into those states? Or is this just more of your opinion?



I'll admit I have no idea and no one else likely does either......

That being said, it doesn't take a "genius" to KNOW there WILL be more, for every CB sold, every bolt, broadhead, target, etc.etc.etc.etc. WILL result in MORE P-R funds, which is NOT the point, the Point IS: what will go with that money???? I am working NOW to try to get that $$ used ( a vast majority of it at least) for more public land, just as I always said I would, once we got expansion.....

F-R I don't spend my time being overly concerned with other states, I have NO problem in letting those state's hunters take care of thier own ........


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> What matters " dipstick" is they are different weapons, classified different by Ky state regs and have seperate seasons. This stuff you are posting is only valid in your class sessions and target practice not in the ky hunting guide:zip:


no "dipstick" that doesn't matter anymore than the fact that compounds are recurves are different. Your concept of validity is a joke and your posts are based on deep seated greed. Its moronic to claim compounds and recurves ought to be in one season and crossbows another

I note you haven't the wattage to deal with the ease of use vs efficiency argument

its fun watching the selfish legions try to twist arguments in a pathetic outcome based exercise trying to work backwards to justify greed. 

every argument you and your fellow travelers have made have been proven non relevant or stupid. try as you might, you cannot prove xbows are "unfair" to either deer or the bigots


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> no "dipstick" that doesn't matter anymore than the fact that compounds are recurves are different. Your concept of validity is a joke and your posts are based on deep seated greed. Its moronic to claim compounds and recurves ought to be in one season and crossbows another
> 
> I note you haven't the wattage to deal with the ease of use vs efficiency argument
> 
> its fun watching the selfish legions try to twist arguments in a pathetic outcome based exercise trying to work backwards to justify greed.
> 
> every argument you and your fellow travelers have made have been proven non relevant or stupid. try as you might, you cannot prove xbows are "unfair" to either deer or the bigots


 Ok a long bow or recurve is the most difficult to use
The compound is the next in line on difficulty
The crossbow is less difficult than all the others combined.
The long bow, recurve and compound are drawn and held by the hunter and the weight of the bow itself is also held.
The crossbow is drawn in advance and only the weight of the bow is required to be held during the shot.
Effiency thats easy, the crossbow, all you gota do is hold up about a 7 or 8 lb crossbow and pull the trigger, much more efficent than having to pick up a compound or trad. bow draw it and shoot .
Wattage pertains to eletricity, do you have an electric winder on your crossbow coach, now that would be efficient:tongue:


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> F-R I don't spend my time being overly concerned with other states, I have NO problem in letting those state's hunters take care of thier own ........


 but you sure don't have a problem using out of staters to get your way onto the LKS. that makes you a hypocrite. :cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

*Funding*

It may surprise you FR (since you're again "talking out of school" here) to realize WE in Ky worked to get a $5 Senior license deal........why? NOT to charge the Seniors $5 .........nope......."matching funds", and you'd be surprised out how much P-R funds that "little idea" has generated!!!

I won't deny that *I* can't do it alone, but I intend to do my part in getting every single $ that I can of this additional money for more public land, more COs and better pay for them in KY...........I hope I will have support and help from both sides of this non-issue in doing so, I've said it all along this IS a "win - win" for all of us, IF we work together to make it one.......and I still believe not only that, but feel it is possible to do so.....


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Ok a long bow or recurve is the most difficult to use
> The compound is the next in line on difficulty
> The crossbow is less difficult than all the others combined.
> The long bow, recurve and compound are drawn and held by the hunter and the weight of the bow itself is also held.
> The crossbow is drawn in advance and only the weight of the bow is required to be held during the shot.
> Effiency thats easy, the crossbow, all you gota do is hold up about a 7 or 8 lb crossbow and pull the trigger, much more efficent than having to pick up a compound or trad. bow draw it and shoot .
> Wattage pertains to eletricity, do you have an electric winder on your crossbow coach, now that would be efficient:tongue:



again what is your rant about. to game managers and objective people its the predicted harvest rate that matters. since we don't have anyway to measure how a person practices ease of use means nothing

you are ignorant of what efficient means 

try again kid and get back to me when you have figured out what this is relevant to


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> It may surprise you FR (since you're again "talking out of school" here) to realize WE in Ky worked to get a $5 Senior license deal........why? NOT to charge the Seniors $5 .........nope......."matching funds", and you'd be surprised out how much P-R funds that "little idea" has generated!!!
> 
> I won't deny that *I* can't do it alone, but I intend to do my part in getting every single $ that I can of this additional money for more public land, more COs and better pay for them in KY...........I hope I will have support and help from both sides of this non-issue in doing so, I've said it all along this IS a "win - win" for all of us, IF we work together to make it one.......and I still believe not only that, but feel it is possible to do so.....


if you don't sue them first.


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> That p-r needs to pay for that useless spoon fed survey that was done first:wink: .
> So since we are talking about public land go check lbl's harvest.
> In 2004 the bow harvest was 149, the firearm 37, in 2005 bow 87 firearm 39. Looks the other way around here don't it Ace



NOPE that survey(and a good one regardless of the spin) IS already paid for, some $70,000+, WHICH btw could have NOT been spent had the opposition TRIED to reach a fair and just compromise......with US.......THEY "bet the farm" on the survey NOT supporting expansion(and not without some good reason, another well known Cornell crossbow survey did just that, as most of us were aware at the time fwiw).....they lost ........you say "spoon fed", PROVE it.......or please drop it, there has been more than ample time for some who have the training to find fault, they couldn't accept that fact....

Just because a few try to bring doubt to the Cornell survey doesn't make it so, and without proof MOST will take Cornell's fine reputation (and the fact they do the US Census surveys as well, among others):wink: 

I've waited for over a year for any PROOF the survey was "fixed" or otherwise flawed........I'm still waiting , but MOSt are wise enough to know because the oppostion makes unfounded accusations, allegations and claims, that is NOT proof.......mere specualtion can't and won't ever prove anything to hardly anyone......and anyone can easily do the same to anything, anyone, or any business for that matter(even where YOU work)......dangeroud to "bet" on *unfounded* claims......imho


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NOPE that survey(and a good one regardless of the spin) IS already paid for, some $70,000+, WHICH btw could have NOT been spent had the opposition TRIED to reach a fair and just compromise......with US.......THEY "bet the farm" on the survey NOT supporting expansion(and not without some good reason, another well known Cornell crossbow survey did just that, as most of us were aware at the time fwiw).....they lost ........you say "spoon fed", PROVE it.......or please drop it, there has been more than ample time for some who have the training to find fault, they couldn't accept that fact....
> 
> Just because a few try to bring doubt to the Cornell survey doesn't make it so, and without proof MOST will take Cornell's fine reputation (and the fact they do the US Census surveys as well, among others):wink:
> heres a hint for your troubled soul. Government work goes to the lowest bidder, not the best place. Enjoy:cocktail:
> I've waited for over a year for any PROOF the survey was "fixed" or otherwise flawed........I'm still waiting , but MOSt are wise enough to know because the oppostion makes unfounded accusations, allegations and claims, that is NOT proof.......mere specualtion can't and won't ever prove anything to hardly anyone......and anyone can easily do the same to anything, anyone, or any business for that matter(even where YOU work)......dangeroud to "bet" on *unfounded* claims......imho


:cocktail:


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> again what is your rant about. to game managers and objective people its the predicted harvest rate that matters. since we don't have anyway to measure how a person practices ease of use means nothing
> 
> you are ignorant of what efficient means
> 
> try again kid and get back to me when you have figured out what this is relevant to


 I don't have no rant Jim. Efficient means to get more done with less work. That is why a crossbow is more efficient in the long run. As far as killing game there is only one degree of dead. The predicted harvest rate is never correct, but those managers always have an excuse. You are certainly ignorant of what intense hunting pressure can do to the success rate on public ground. You do not care about those folks. Check out that link to Lbl I posted above it is standing proof .


----------



## aceoky

First "governement work" doesn't ALWAYS go to the lowest bidder (and often doesn't "down here" fwiw) ......Secondly Cornell WAS chosen based on their reputation NOT COST.........too bad you didn't know that......The KDFWR could have chosen anyone (even IF they cost more)......it WAS up to them, still the FACT is; it could have been easily avoided had the opposition been willing to compromise AND WE offered less than we ended up getting later........:cocktail:


----------



## Free Range

> That being said, it doesn't take a "genius" to KNOW there WILL be more, for every CB sold, every bolt, broadhead, target, etc.etc.etc.etc. WILL result in MORE P-R funds, which is NOT the point, the Point IS: what will go with that money???? I am working NOW to try to get that $$ used ( a vast majority of it at least) for more public land, just as I always said I would, once we got expansion.....


Really, let’s look a little closer, as thinking people do. The number of hunters is dropping across this country. Of those remaining they already spend money on hunting items, and most are not millionaires, so are on at least a somewhat limited budget. So are you telling me and the rest here that because of the xb, everyone is going to ADD the XB expenses to their budget? More likely, genius, they will move funds from one hunting expenditure to buy these XB items. In affect no net gain in P-R funds, so good luck buying all that new land with money you don’t have. 



> It may surprise you FR (since you're again "talking out of school" here) to realize WE in Ky worked to get a $5 Senior license deal........why


?

Nothing you do surprises me. But please do tell, what is this 5$ senior license? Are you putting it to the elderly in your state? We let them hunt and fish free here, after all the years they have given to the outdoors, and most being on a limited budget, we believe it’s time they get a break.


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> You are certainly ignorant of what intense hunting pressure can do to the success rate on public ground. You do not care about those folks. Check out that link to Lbl I posted above it is standing proof .


Let's check on that shall we?? PRE expansion data, thus the CB has NO impact on that, thus the point is moot! IF there is a problem NO one can blame the CB , it hadn't had an expanded season had it now???  

NOT to mention the VAST amount of "changes" that have been made recently on most WMA's.........think perhaps THAT might have had any impact on deer movement for example? OR the massive acorn crop WE had last year in KY??

Could be a variety of factors ONE thing it isn't is CB related, and most know that.......:cocktail:


----------



## Free Range

> Could be a variety of factors ONE thing it isn't is CB related, and most know that.......



And you’re telling us no one using a XB will hunt public land? And you’re telling us there will be no burgeoning (had to look that one up) of hunters during archery season after expansion? Gee Ace, you seem to say one thing, then turn around and say the opposite when it fits your, agenda.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I don't have no rant Jim. Efficient means to get more done with less work. That is why a crossbow is more efficient in the long run. As far as killing game there is only one degree of dead. The predicted harvest rate is never correct, but those managers always have an excuse. You are certainly ignorant of what intense hunting pressure can do to the success rate on public ground. You do not care about those folks. Check out that link to Lbl I posted above it is standing proof .



wrong again, most experts find the compound more efficient. I agree, I don't care what those who got theirs and don't want others to share think. Archery season should be open to anyone no matter what bow they want to use. Limiting numbers based on lies and distortions concerning gear is counterproductive and it doesn't help hunting to have some hunters purveying lies and distortions are false arguments serving as a pretext for greed.

I have always said that if there is too much hunting pressure you limit based on a fair system rather than based on bias and prejudice and lies


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Really, let’s look a little closer, as thinking people do. The number of hunters is dropping across this country. Of those remaining they already spend money on hunting items, and most are not millionaires, so are on at least a somewhat limited budget. So are you telling me and the rest here that because of the xb, everyone is going to ADD the XB expenses to their budget? More likely, genius, they will move funds from one hunting expenditure to buy these XB items. In affect no net gain in P-R funds, so good luck buying all that new land with money you don’t have.
> 
> ?
> 
> "Thinking people" don't ASSUME so much as a general rule!!
> 
> Fist you MAY have a point but ONLY IF, there were NO new hunters which is NOT the case there ARE already NEW hunters buying CB in KY!!! Just as they DID in Tenn (and I know YOU were told that on that forum btw)......
> 
> You "assume" so much, when the facts and data support exactly what I've stated.....What IS "funny" IS you guys keep saying it's ALL about the $$$ then turn right around and say it's NOT........so which is it??
> 
> Nothing you do surprises me. But please do tell, what is this 5$ senior license? Are you putting it to the elderly in your state? We let them hunt and fish free here, after all the years they have given to the outdoors, and most being on a limited budget, we believe it’s time they get a break.


WE used to also, however We NOW have one for $5 for combo hunting/fishing which generates millions of $$ in MATCHING FUNDS we were losing.........NOT been a problem here (well except for those who like you who don't understand or don't wish to admit, it's a great idea) $5 for an ANNUAL joint hunting/fishing license is NOT going to break anyone......but since it puts ( I believe IIRC from memory) $10 addtional MATCHING FUNDS Dollars in our collective pockets (meaning the KDFWR's)......who work for ALL of us.........it's a great idea that everyone seems very happy with!

They ONLY spend $5 WE get $15 per senior..........hurts no one, helps a great deal.............Thank you but I'm NO genius......btw


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> Let's check on that shall we?? PRE expansion data, thus the CB has NO impact on that, thus the point is moot! IF there is a problem NO one can blame the CB , it hadn't had an expanded season had it now???
> 
> NOT to mention the VAST amount of "changes" that have been made recently on most WMA's.........think perhaps THAT might have had any impact on deer movement for example? OR the massive acorn crop WE had last year in KY??
> 
> Could be a variety of factors ONE thing it isn't is CB related, and most know that.......:cocktail:


 Ace this is clear fact that the increased amount of hunters of the firearm hunts there effects the harvest in a negative way. There has been no changes there, this year there is a law suit to stop farming and etc.We do not know how that will play out. The #'s are from a record mast and no mast years , they run out the same ,double the harvest by bow hunters


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> wrong again, most experts find the compound more efficient. I agree, I don't care what those who got theirs and don't want others to share think. Archery season should be open to anyone no matter what bow they want to use. Limiting numbers based on lies and distortions concerning gear is counterproductive and it doesn't help hunting to have some hunters purveying lies and distortions are false arguments serving as a pretext for greed.
> 
> I have always said that if there is too much hunting pressure you limit based on a fair system rather than based on bias and prejudice and lies


 Now what you are refering to is the efficiency of the # of pull v/s kinetic energy of the 2 weapons. Duh thats a no brainer the compound has a longer powerstroke and so does a trad. bow. The crossbow makes up for that with about double the # of pull.
The advantage comes in where a crossbows peak work is done long before the shot , thus more efficient on the hunter.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> First "governement work" doesn't ALWAYS go to the lowest bidder (and often doesn't "down here" fwiw) ......Secondly Cornell WAS chosen based on their reputation NOT COST.........too bad you didn't know that......The KDFWR could have chosen anyone (even IF they cost more)......it WAS up to them, still the FACT is; it could have been easily avoided had the opposition been willing to compromise AND WE offered less than we ended up getting later........:cocktail:


Your so lost it isn't funny. have a look. 
http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/045a00/365.pdf somebody broke the law. you cannot chose "Anyone" Ace. any lawyer could tell you that


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Marvin said:


> Your so lost it isn't funny. have a look.
> http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/045a00/365.pdf somebody broke the law. you cannot chose "Anyone" Ace. any lawyer could tell you that


 Oh me our govenor would not be happy about this because he is trying to make Ky a right to work state and dissolve prevailing wage :wink:


----------



## Marvin

KY MUSTANG said:


> Oh me our govenor would not be happy about this because he is trying to make Ky a right to work state and dissolve prevailing wage :wink:


Then you better let him know of potential mis-use of public dollars. Very serious offense.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Your so lost it isn't funny. have a look.
> http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/045a00/365.pdf somebody broke the law. you cannot chose "Anyone" Ace. any lawyer could tell you that


So now you ARE a lawyer???  


Just so you (and everyone knows) this has already been debated here, and since the KDFWR has a very good lawyer, NO law was broken.......(duh)

Secondly.......notice....

45A.365 *Competitive sealed bidding.*



This WAS NOT a "State Contract", it was an Inependent Survey sought by the KDFWR........nice try but ANY lawyer knows the differences.....IN fact as I understand it(and I'm NO lawyer) the KDFWR did NOT even have to seek others .........they are NOT bound by any of that, by statute or Reg......


I've tried to explain this to you before the KDFWR does NOT recieve ANY General Fund $$$..........they're indepedently financed by OUR license and tag fees, boat fees etc.etc.etc. NO GF $ means they are NOT bound by those rules ........Nice try.......no cigar


----------



## Free Range

> WE used to also, however We NOW have one for $5 for combo hunting/fishing which generates millions of $$.


Millions??? So let’s assume 2,000,000, at 5$ each, with 10$ matching funds, that’s 133,333 seniors in KY buying a combo hunt/fish license. Sounds a little high to me, I’ll be back after a little more research.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> So now you ARE a lawyer???
> 
> 
> Just so you (and everyone knows) this has already been debated here, and since the KDFWR has a very good lawyer, NO law was broken.......(duh)
> 
> Secondly.......notice....
> 
> 45A.365 *Competitive sealed bidding.*
> 
> 
> 
> This WAS NOT a "State Contract", it was an Inependent Survey sought by the KDFWR........nice try but ANY lawyer knows the differences.....IN fact as I understand it(and I'm NO lawyer) the KDFWR did NOT even have to seek others .........they are NOT bound by any of that, by statute or Reg......
> 
> 
> I've tried to explain this to you before the KDFWR does NOT recieve ANY General Fund $$$..........they're indepedently financed by OUR license and tag fees, boat fees etc.etc.etc. NO GF $ means they are NOT bound by those rules ........Nice try.......no cigar



Short on talent aren't you ace. It does not matter where their money comes from bud, its public money and MUST Be authorized by the state or govenor for its release. Its really THAT Simple. ... even though you seem to struggle with that concept. Yeah they just called Cornell up and said we need your help.   welcome to lala land. blank check HAHAHAHAHHA


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Now what you are refering to is the efficiency of the # of pull v/s kinetic energy of the 2 weapons. Duh thats a no brainer the compound has a longer powerstroke and so does a trad. bow. The crossbow makes up for that with about double the # of pull.
> The advantage comes in where a crossbows peak work is done long before the shot , thus more efficient on the hunter.



Uh you are down to your last strike. Keep trying


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> And you’re telling us no one using a XB will hunt public land? And you’re telling us there will be no burgeoning (had to look that one up) of hunters during archery season after expansion? Gee Ace, you seem to say one thing, then turn around and say the opposite when it fits your, agenda.



Please POST up where I ever said that! You can't because I didn't......

What I DID in fact say was:

When you spread MORE hunters out over a longer season AND with a ONE buck statewide limit, most "thinking people" would easily realize there won't be this "Huge overcrowding" that you guys fear.........period......It makes NO difference what weapon one uses .....once you've "hit your lmit"(or ofen just what YOU want to take)........you're "done".....period

NOW add in the "time limitations" most working people have and again it's very easy to see more opportunity will allow for this to occur, rather than the majority having to take some of thier vacation time for deer hunting....NOT hard to figure out, IF one has an "open mind".......

YOU would love to overlook the Sept - Jan 16 archery season we have in KY, but it's a fact.........that's a long time for hunters to take game.......even IF the crossbow gets in the whole season, it's reasonable to beleive with that many days, "overcrowding" won't be an issue (and it's certainly not now during archery season period)......

I guess we'll soon see come this season with the expansion we do have, (and it's much shorter which would aid in "overcrowding" vs a long season)......:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Short on talent aren't you ace. I
> 
> t does not matter where their money comes from bud, its public money and MUST Be authorized by the state or govenor for its release. Its really THAT Simple. ... even though you seem to struggle with that concept. Yeah they just called Cornell up and said we need your help.   welcome to lala land. blank check HAHAHAHAHHA



Not at all, I just KNOW what I'm talking about and YOU obviously do NOT.......

It DOES matter, and the KDFWR has the authority, whether you beleive it or not doesn't matter, plus it's NOT public money.......best do some more research on KY and the KDFWR......you're "way off base"........


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Millions??? So let’s assume 2,000,000, at 5$ each, with 10$ matching funds, that’s 133,333 seniors in KY buying a combo hunt/fish license. Sounds a little high to me, I’ll be back after a little more research.



You ARE funny! I'm saying "millions" $$$ since it was started not per year(though I do believe it's over 1 million $ per).........who cares how it sounds to you??? Fact IS, P-R funds ARE real, and they do add up.......contrary (again) to your "spin" on the matter......:cocktail: 

Bottom line, it generates MUCH more than it costs, for ALL of Ky hunters,anglers and even bird watchers etc. to benefit from, YET you are trying to "paint" it as a "bad thing", which it certainly is not...


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> Uh you are down to your last strike. Keep trying


 You were never in the ball park to begin with. Tell us a logical reason the weapons seasons should be side by side big boy. Other than your greed to take up the entire archery season


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> You were never in the ball park to begin with. Tell us a logical reason the weapons seasons should be side by side big boy. Other than your greed to take up the entire archery season


You lose again

You clearly have proven you don't have the tools to debate this issue with me

compounds took up the entire archery season and that didn't hurt anything

all archery weapons should be in the same season. You can't prove it hurts anything and your pathetic and unlearned attempts to demonstrate that a crossbow has some advantages over compound bows that translate into more efficient (ie deadlier) deer killing weapons is without merit, proof or logical support

we all know why you spend so much time trying to demonstrate that crossbows are different based on non relevant aspects from compounds-its to justify your greed and selfishness. nothing more, nothing less and what proves how lame your argument is is that you and your ilk don't apply the same standards to the compound vs trad bow division


----------



## Free Range

> You ARE funny! I'm saying "millions" $$$ since it was started not per year(though I do believe it's over 1 million $ per).........who cares how it sounds to you??? Fact IS, P-R funds ARE real, and they do add up.......contrary (again) to your "spin" on the matter......


Ok good, now it’s over it’s life, I can go with that. But, you are right any added tax is a bad thing, I wouldn’t expect you to understand, differences in political beliefs I would guess. I don’t think sticking it to the elderly is a good thing, how many elderly are there in KY, wouldn’t adding .50$ to each license, hunting and fishing of none-elderly have done the same thing? But your state voted for this tax on the elderly so I don’t really care beside the fact I think it stinks to do that, and you brag about it. 

So you gained some P-R funds, I hope you are successful in getting that money turned into land. Now back to the topic, P-R funds generated by the XB, so you admit it is only your opinion that there, MAY, be more P-R funds generated, I thought you were the talker of truth and facts, and opinion had no place in your thesis? Please at least try to be consistent.


----------



## Free Range

> When you spread MORE hunters out over a longer season AND with a ONE buck statewide limit, most "thinking people" would easily realize there won't be this "Huge overcrowding" that you guys fear.........period......It makes NO difference what weapon one uses .....once you've "hit your lmit"(or ofen just what YOU want to take)........you're "done".....period


KY said, it is now crowded on public land and provided proof of this, you said the xb had nothing to do with that because expansion hadn’t happen yet, are you starting to see where you are trapped. You said there will be plenty of people using the xb providing more P-R funds, (added people during archery, for those of you that are slow). Now if there already exist some over crowding, how is adding more going to make that better? I say it’s not. And when did they add length to the season? It’s still the same, just now there will be more hunters concentrated into the existing season. 



> NOW add in the "time limitations" most working people have and again it's very easy to see more opportunity will allow for this to occur, rather than the majority having to take some of thier vacation time for deer hunting....NOT hard to figure out, IF one has an "open mind".......


All these things are already in place, the hunters that now hunt during archery season, already have these time limitations, you are only adding more to it. And as for vacation time, most “hunters” I know save their vacation time just for hunting, I guess I hang with more dedicated hunters then you, because to us it’s not a bad thing to use ones vacation for hunting. 



> YOU would love to overlook the Sept - Jan 16 archery season we have in KY, but it's a fact.........that's a long time for hunters to take game.......even IF the crossbow gets in the whole season, it's reasonable to beleive with that many days, "overcrowding" won't be an issue (and it's certainly not now during archery season period)......


Again I will go with facts provided by KY Mustang, and he says there is already over crowding on public lands, maybe you should get off your private land you hunt and try it some time, I bet KY Mustang would love to give you some advice as to where you should try.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Not at all, I just KNOW what I'm talking about and YOU obviously do NOT.......
> 
> It DOES matter, and the KDFWR has the authority, whether you beleive it or not doesn't matter, plus it's NOT public money.......best do some more research on KY and the KDFWR......you're "way off base"........




150.021 Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources.
(1) The Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources shall constitute a department of
state government within the meaning of KRS Chapter 12. The department shall
consist of a commissioner, a Fish and Wildlife Resources Commission, the Division
of Law Enforcement, and other agents and employees provided for in this chapter.
The department shall enforce the laws and regulations adopted under this chapter
relating to wildlife and shall exercise all powers necessarily incident thereto.
(2) Any powers conferred by this chapter upon the Department of Fish and Wildlife
Resources, the Fish and Wildlife Resources Commission, or the commissioner of
the Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, and any powers conferred by KRS
Chapter 235 shall be exercised subject to the provisions of KRS Chapters 42, 45,
*45A*, 56, and 64, which chapters in all respects are controlling.
Effective: July 15, 1998
History: Amended 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 23, sec. 14, effective July 15, 1998. -- Amended
1994 Ky. Acts ch. 118, sec. 9, effective July 15, 1994. -- Amended 1990 Ky. Acts
ch. 496, sec. 43, effective July 13, 1990. -- Amended 1966 Ky. Acts ch. 255, sec. 143
-- Amended 1952 Ky. Acts ch. 200, sec. 3 -- Amended 1948 Ky. Acts ch. 78, sec. 3 --
Created 1944 Ky. Acts ch. 6, sec. 1.
Page 1 of 1


notice this

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/*045*a00/365.pdf

HAHA. You got some work to do. I am going to dig even deeper now. Too bad for you "ace"


----------



## aceoky

Marvin, with all due respect , you sir are wrong......to prove it recently we had a former gov TRY to get his greedy little hands on the "surplus funds"(usually saved to buy public land etc. when found available).........HE LOST! NOW your contention that he is or would have been in control is easily disproven on that one case.........a legal case.......ask ANY lawyer........In many states I suspect you are correct, in KY however you are not.....IF it were "public money" as you maintain he would have won the case, it's not and he didnt' end of story....see, I'm not "guessing" as I said I KNOW...


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin, with all due respect , you sir are wrong......to prove it recently we had a former gov TRY to get his greedy little hands on the "surplus funds"(usually saved to buy public land etc. when found available).........HE LOST! NOW your contention that he is or would have been in control is easily disproven on that one case.........a legal case.......ask ANY lawyer........In many states I suspect you are correct, in KY however you are not.....IF it were "public money" as you maintain he would have won the case, it's not and he didnt' end of story....see, I'm not "guessing" as I said I KNOW...



150.150 Game and fish fund.
(1) Except as provided in this chapter, all moneys derived from the sale of licenses or
from any other source connected with the administration of this chapter shall be
promptly paid over to the State Treasurer, who shall deposit such moneys in a
special fund, known as the game and fish fund. The game and fish fund shall be
used to carry out the purposes of this chapter and any law or regulation for the
protection of wildlife and for no other purpose.
(2) All funds received under KRS 150.110 and 150.520 shall be used by the department
for the purpose of enforcing those sections and for the protection and propagation of
mussel beds. Any surplus remaining in the fund at the close of each calendar year
*shall be turned into the general fund of the department*.

looks like you lied again. says right here what that money is supposed to do.


----------



## aceoky

FR feel free to beleive and accept anything you wish, doesn't change anything , and siince MOST hunters in Ky(over 90% in fact) hunt Private land his points are moot anyway ........to at least a large extent, plus, NO way to dispute having a longer season reduces the number of hunters on any given day.........."thinking people" would KNOW this......since it's so obvious.....

Ky mustang ALSO said gun hunting overcrowding......NICE of you to not post that part........more "spin"........no facts


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> 150.150 Game and fish fund.
> (1) Except as provided in this *chapter*, all moneys derived from the sale of licenses or
> from any other source connected with the administration of this chapter shall be
> promptly paid over to the State Treasurer, who shall deposit such moneys in a
> special fund, known as the *game and fish fund*. The game and fish fund shall be
> used to carry out the purposes of this chapter and any law or regulation for the
> protection of wildlife and for no other purpose.
> (2) All funds received under KRS 150.110 and 150.520 shall be used by the department
> for the purpose of enforcing those sections and *for the protection and propagation of
> mussel beds. *Any surplus remaining in the fund at the close of each calendar year
> *shall be turned into the general fund of the department*.
> 
> looks like you lied again. says right here what that money is supposed to do.



NICE reach...........I'll give you that, but posting a PART of a HUGE set of laws won't change ONE thing I've stated, it's a fact.......easily proven....and I didn't lie, no reason to , but according to what YOU are saying there is NO money to even pay the Conservation Officers in KY.........think anyone beleives that???

Funny that mussle beds in your mind relate to ALL funds btw..... 

(it's in another KRS.......as are all the things I've stated in fact there are PAGES of laws on the KDFWR many of them I'm well versed in for a non lawyer at least, having some lawyer friends does help fwiw) :cocktail: 

Keep on checking........because I know what is "what" on this, I dealt with them(the KDFWR and the laws) for many years..... again I'm not guessing...

(edited to add) 

IF you were correct (and you're not); WHERE would any $$ come from to buy public land???? See? NO way can anyone even begin to "think" what you've posted makes sense, ONLY in the part of the Regs and Statutes being refrenced does it matter and that is NOT what I'm talking about(obviously.......I never mentioned the mussles did I?)


----------



## JDMiller

Not trying to interrupt the same old debate ...but heres something to think about............... 

I arrive at our farm one afternoon and I go through my normal routine of trying to de-scent myself and my gear.....head into the woods...and climb into my stand. Its archery / crossbow season....and I'm packing a crossbow today.....a nice heavy beamed 8-pointer strolls by.....I raise my crossbow......settle my dot just behind his front shoulder as he slightly quarters away....I trigger the shot. I hear that familliar thud as I see a flash of my yellow fletching disappear in the spot I was aiming. The bucks kicks his hind legs like he's been stung by a bee..and the buck runs off with his tail rolling in corkscrew fashion. I take note of the last place I saw him before he got out of view.....I listen carefully and I hear his run slow down to just footsteps. Then I hear a crash & thrashing in the leaves. I check my watch......I feel pretty confident in the shot but I force myself to wait about 30 minutes....seems to last forever.

The time finally passes......I ease down the stand and walk to where I made the shot....... I find a little blood and see a streak in the leaves where my bolt had burried under the leaves. I dig around a little and retreive my bolt....fletchings covered in bright red blood with slight bubbles. I figure I definitely got some lung. It's getting pretty dim so I break out my light and start what should be a short trailing job. I go about 10 yds and the blood is getting heavier....even sprayed upon the trees and folage in several places. I'm now on a pretty worn trail and with my light I get a glimpse of something reflecting in the distance ..... its the eyes of the buck laying at the edge of the trail and a swag between two ridges. I get a feeling of relief..... this was pretty easy trailing....this time. 

I admire the deer for a few minutes and with the temps I decide I better get the deer field dressed pretty quick. I break out my favorite knife and go to work. I get done and drag the deer a little ways down the trail. I stop for a few minutes....then repeat the pull until I'm within sight of my truck. I go to the truck and back it down the edge of a road ditch . The tailgate is closer to the ground now. I pull on the deer and wrestle it up in the bed of the truck. I put my crossbow back in the case and head towards the house. I stop off at a friends to show him what luck I had. I repeat the accounts that led me to this point. He tells me ....you done good. I tell him I need to snatch the hide off and get the meat in the cooler. I head toward the house again. 

I get home....my daughter is about as excited as I am.....she looks the deer over and touches it. Questions some of the marks on its neck , face and back. I explain the rut to her and how deer will fight each other to get the girl. She laughs it off and help me get the deer hung up. I remove the cape and begin to quarter the animal up. I have a big 120 qt cooler I'm putting the meat into. My wife runs to town to get several bags of ice. When she returns I'm just about finished with the processing. I ice everything down and tell her that I will finish up and wrap the meat tommorrow. I head in....shower ....relax watching TV and call my deer into Tele-Check...write my confirmation number on my tag and feel pretty good about my harvest. 

I sit and relive the hunt and remember my daughters excitement. I think to myself..... this is a familliar feeling and I would not trade it for nothing. Its been a great season. 

Now I ask you....... Is'nt this a example of what its about. Remove the word crossbow and add recurve, stick or compound bow.....how much difference does it really make. Does it really matter if you raised the crossbow or drew your compound.....the outcome, traditions and overall experience is the same. Hunting takes on several forms but in the end it's a individuals personal experiences that matters the most. How did my hunting with a crossbow really impact your hunting or your experiences? To answer that....it did'nt. Sometimes we need to be reminded of that.

Sorry for the interruption......carry on.:wink:


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> Ace this *is clear fact that the increased amount of hunters of the firearm hunts *there effects the harvest in a negative way. T
> 
> here has been no changes there, this year there is a law suit to stop farming and etc.We do not know how that will play out. The #'s are from a record mast and no mast years , they run out the same ,double the harvest by bow hunters


Just for YOU Fr...... 

NOW you explain why getting some of them out earlier and "spread out" over a longer season would NOT change that........:cocktail:


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NICE reach...........I'll give you that, but posting a PART of a HUGE set of laws won't change ONE thing I've stated, it's a fact.......easily proven....and I didn't lie, no reason to , but according to what YOU are saying there is NO money to even pay the Conservation Officers in KY.........think anyone beleives that???
> 
> Funny that mussle beds in your mind relate to ALL funds btw.....
> 
> (it's in another KRS.......as are all the things I've stated in fact there are PAGES of laws on the KDFWR many of them I'm well versed in for a non lawyer at least, having some lawyer friends does help fwiw) :cocktail:
> 
> Keep on checking........because I know what is "what" on this, I dealt with them(the KDFWR and the laws) for many years..... again I'm not guessing...
> 
> (edited to add)
> 
> IF you were correct (and you're not); WHERE would any $$ come from to buy public land???? See? NO way can anyone even begin to "think" what you've posted makes sense, ONLY in the part of the Regs and Statutes being refrenced does it matter and that is NOT what I'm talking about(obviously.......I never mentioned the mussles did I?)



Ace, all we have to do is give you enough rope. This is truly fun to watch. Ask your buddies who you supposively work with to cite he code that allows them to spend 70 k with on person of their choosing. Please do us that favor if your SOOOOO right. You lied and got caught bud but here is your chance.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Ok good, now it’s over it’s life, I can go with that. But, you are right any added tax is a bad thing, I wouldn’t expect you to understand, differences in political beliefs I would guess. I don’t think sticking it to the elderly is a good thing, how many elderly are there in KY, wouldn’t adding .50$ to each license, hunting and fishing of none-elderly have done the same thing?
> 
> FIrst It's NOT a tax, secondly NO it wouldn't have done even close to the same thing......P-R funds don't work like that, as I said, you're talking out of school...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But your state voted for this tax on the elderly so I don’t really care beside the fact I think it stinks to do that, and you brag about it.
> 
> It's NOT a tax and We didn't vote on it.......again you just don't understand the Legislature doesn't need be THAT involved here in KY
> 
> So you gained some P-R funds, I hope you are successful in getting that money turned into land. Now back to the topic, P-R funds generated by the XB, so you admit it is only your opinion that there, MAY, be more P-R funds generated, I thought you were the talker of truth and facts, and opinion had no place in your thesis? Please at least try to be consistent.



It's a FACT there are already NEW hunters buying them in KY.....sheesh, please try to keep up........EVERY hunting/fishing related ITEM sold brings in P-R funds.........PERIOD.....More sales = more $$$ for ALL of us (and that is in every state as far as I know being it's Federal Law).....NO one can dispute that.....it's a matter of known fact

Some in the case of license/tag sales can generate matching funds and any way you look at it a 3/1 return is very good (300%) a positive most can easily see.....MORE hunters = More matching fund $$$.......I don't for a minute believe that concept is "over your head".......


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Ace, all we have to do is give you enough rope. This is truly fun to watch. Ask your buddies who you supposively work with to cite he code that allows them to spend 70 k with on person of their choosing. Please do us that favor if your SOOOOO right. You lied and got caught bud but here is your chance.



That's "funny" since I'm not the one *trying * to use the "mussle krs" on hunting issues.......I can handle the rope, don't concern yourself at all......again the fact there is NO lawsuit filed by the oppostion proves it for me...........thought by now you'd figured that out without me needing to state it.......sheesh  

Unless you honestly think the same people who RAN to the lawmakers twice , would NOT have done that(now that's a funny position and one impossible to defend at the same time, considering we all know a lawyer IS/Was involved)........simple really NO law was broken end of story, feel very free to dispute it, convince everyone you can otherwise.......but unless a suit is won on the matter, you have nothing as usual......


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> That's "funny" since I'm not the one *trying * to use the "mussle krs" on hunting issues.......I can handle the rope, don't concern yourself at all......again the fact there is NO lawsuit filed by the oppostion proves it for me...........thought by now you'd figured that out without me needing to state it.......sheesh
> 
> Unless you honestly think the same people who RAN to the lawmakers twice , would NOT have done that(now that's a funny position and one impossible to defend at the same time, considering we all know a lawyer IS/Was involved)........simple really NO law was broken end of story, feel very free to dispute it, convince everyone you can otherwise.......but unless a suit is won on the matter, you have nothing as usual......


Actually only childish people threaten with lawsuits. I am sure they are trying to be men about it unlike others:zip:


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> So now you ARE a lawyer???
> 
> 
> Just so you (and everyone knows) this has already been debated here, and since the KDFWR has a very good lawyer, NO law was broken.......(duh)
> 
> Secondly.......notice....
> 
> 45A.365 *Competitive sealed bidding.*
> 
> 
> 
> This WAS NOT a "State Contract", it was an Inependent Survey sought by the KDFWR........nice try but ANY lawyer knows the differences.....IN fact as I understand it(and I'm NO lawyer) the KDFWR did NOT even have to seek others ( i would not seek others either if I found a place that gives me the answers i want anyway) ( common sense would tell most people to open it up to public bid to #1 save money you keep crowing about and #2 negate the chance for their to be an inpropriety which is obvious) .........they are NOT bound by any of that, by statute or Reg......
> 
> 
> I've tried to explain this to you before the KDFWR does NOT recieve ANY General Fund $$$..........they're indepedently financed by OUR license and tag fees, boat fees etc.etc.etc. NO GF $ means they are NOT bound by those rules ........Nice try.......no cigar



Just had to add


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> So now you ARE a lawyer???
> 
> 
> Just so you (and everyone knows) this has already been debated here, and since the KDFWR has a very good lawyer, NO law was broken.......(duh)
> 
> Secondly.......notice....
> 
> 45A.365 *Competitive sealed bidding.*
> 
> 
> 
> This WAS NOT a "State Contract", it was an Inependent Survey sought by the KDFWR........nice try but ANY lawyer knows the differences.....IN fact as I understand it(and I'm NO lawyer) the KDFWR did NOT even have to seek others .........they are NOT bound by any of that, by statute or Reg......
> 
> 
> I've tried to explain this to you before the KDFWR does NOT recieve ANY General Fund $$$..........they're indepedently financed by OUR license and tag fees, boat fees etc.etc.etc. NO GF $ means they are NOT bound by those rules ........Nice try.......no cigar



Ace - You need to learn to keep your mouth closed when you don't know what in the hell you're talking about. It is absolutely mind boggling that you would even begin to argue that this survey didn't involve a "state contract" or that it's "so simple really" that "ANY lawyer knows the difference." 

And what makes you think I didn't know about this? Do you really think our state legislators weren't wondering why they spent $70,000 for Cornell to administer a survey that easily could've been handled by an in-state institution for a lot less money? Think really hard before you chime in again. 

You haven't seen the contract (yes, there was a signed state contract). You don't know whether or even which "very good lawyer" at KDFWR reviewed it. If you don't KNOW the facts and you don't understand the law, you might want to consider bowing out gracefully.


----------



## spec

Great post ballard!!!


----------



## Free Range

Now I ask you....... Is'nt this a example of what its about. Remove the word crossbow and add recurve, stick or compound bow.....how much difference does it really make. Does it really matter if you raised the crossbow or drew your compound.....the outcome, traditions and overall experience is the same. Hunting takes on several forms but in the end it's a individuals personal experiences that matters the most. How did my hunting with a crossbow really impact your hunting or your experiences? To answer that....it did'nt. Sometimes we need to be reminded of that.

Nice story, and I would guess it really happened, just that way. It makes no difference, you could just as well had a rifle or ML in your hands. No one here wants to keep you from hunting, you can enjoy it all you want, just as no one here wants to stop gun hunters from having a blast when they are in the woods too. I have in the very long ago past had just such an experience hunting with a rifle, should I try to force my weapon of choice into archery just because I may enjoy rifle hunting?


----------



## Free Range

> FIrst It's NOT a tax, secondly NO it wouldn't have done even close to the same thing......P-R funds don't work like that, as I said, you're talking out of school...


Ok how do P-R funds work, they only match funds from the elderly? And yes it is a tax, I don’t care how the liberals dress it up, when you have to pay the government money to do something it’s a tax. 



> It's NOT a tax and We didn't vote on it.......again you just don't understand the Legislature doesn't need be THAT involved here in KY



See above for the definition of tax. 



> Some in the case of license/tag sales can generate matching funds and any way you look at it a 3/1 return is very good (300%) a positive most can easily see.....MORE hunters = More matching fund $$$.......I don't for a minute believe that concept is "over your head".......


Above you said it don’t work that way, now does P-R match license sales or not? Please stay consistent you are confusing this simple country boy with your back and forth statements.


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> That's "funny" since I'm not the one *trying * to use the "mussle krs" on hunting issues.......I can handle the rope, don't concern yourself at all......again the fact there is NO lawsuit filed by the oppostion proves it for me...........thought by now you'd figured that out without me needing to state it.......sheesh
> 
> Unless you honestly think the same people who RAN to the lawmakers twice , would NOT have done that(now that's a funny position and one impossible to defend at the same time, considering we all know a lawyer IS/Was involved)........simple really NO law was broken end of story, feel very free to dispute it, convince everyone you can otherwise.......but unless a suit is won on the matter, you have nothing as usual......


. . . and just for the record, I wouldn't have responded if you hadn't dragged me back into this by suggesting that the survey must've been legally kosher or else I would've filed a lawsuit. You might want to remember that I don't publicly post everything I know, Ace. 

SB 211 would have resulted in complete closure on the xbow issue. I know you weren't happy that the UCBK was left out of the "compromise" process, but the UCBK had maybe 10 resident members at the time (the balance consisted of Canadians and other non-residents that Wille enlisted from the Excalibur xbow forum). That's not very representative and may have been a reason why Commissioner Gassett chose not to call you guys. Once the deal was struck and SB 211 was withdrawn, there was absolutely no reason to address these other issues which were known by basically everyone (except, of course, you). So, please stop suggesting that the lack of a lawsuit somehow lends credibility to your argument that KDFWR's separate bankroll somehow exempts them from Ky's governing statutes.


----------



## aceoky

Ballard with all due respect, yes I'm aware of the signed contract (and how could you possibly know whether or not I've read it??) 

I just may have placed a "few ideas" with the correct people on how it (the survey) might be done in fact for all you know(or don't)....:cocktail: 


The UCBK has more than 10 residents at the time, first, secondly IF you'd bothered to read JD already accounted for the REAL numbers (let's just say you're way off and leave it at that OK?)......PLUS it was NOT Dr. Gassett's meeting, as I'm certain you're well aware.....

Also, since you brought up the "separate bankroll" , and painted me as "spouting off" about what I don't know about......maybe you'll enlighten me on why our former Gov had NO luck in "touching" ANY of the money??:cocktail: 

YOU said *" I wouldn't have responded if you hadn't dragged me back into this by suggesting that the survey must've been legally kosher or else I would've filed a lawsuit. "* That's "funny" because as my little ole memory serves YOU and Tom C. had this same discussion on kyhunting and you NEVER denied that..........wonder why not then but NOW you do??? I still think IF you had a case you'd presented it, am I really incorrect on that (obvious assumption......)????? 

BTW what I DID say was, IF by them going to Cornell(and most KNOW the reasson why it was NOT done "in state" and the tactics used proved that to be wise IMHO)......without taking "bids" was Illlegal YOu or someone WOULD have filed a lawsuit, do you disagree? In other words Ballard are YOU saying IF you found that they'd done this in an illegal manner you'd NOT have filed one???? 

Too many involved had too much influence with the Major Ky Colleges to "trust" ANY outcome (from either side, IOW NO matter the outcome it would have never been trusted because of that......by going Independent THAT problem was solved......don't you agree?)

YES, I'm very much aware some in the Legislature were "curious" as to why(and who caused them to be) it was done out of state, but once they found out why(above) every single one I talked to directly , or on the phone or in email understood the concept completly and seemed to agree as well.....

For someone who has never even met me, knows almost nothing about me, it's "odd" how you can post what I've done, and haven't done, what I know or don't know etc.etc.etc. 

I noticed you didn't answer my question on whether you're willing to work together for the good of Ky .....

Bottom line it's done, this is "over" at least for now, I'm more than willing to "move on" to more productive things, the facts of what did take place are a matter of record, WE both know exactly what ALL that was(and wasn't and who did what,and at least some of the reason why you became involved and it had nothing to do with the CB did it?) Still, I have nothing against you at all, I don't blame you if you'd filed a suit, since I have no doubt had you done so it would have been what's best in your very learned opinion......I stated that you didn't .......was I wrong on that or not??(and that NO one else did either btw , so I never meant that you were the only one who would have or could have Strader I beleive would have IF he thought he could have won....don't you think?......to name ONLY one other I considered besides you....fwiw)


----------



## thesource

ballard said:


> I know you weren't happy that the UCBK was left out of the "compromise" process, but the *UCBK had maybe 10 resident members at the time (the balance consisted of Canadians and other non-residents that Wille enlisted from the Excalibur xbow forum).* That's not very representative and may have been a reason why Commissioner Gassett chose not to call you guys.


OMG 

I can't breathe I'm laughing so hard!!!!!

UCBK and its supporters look like chumps yet again!:darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

JDMiller said:


> Now I ask you....... Is'nt this a example of what its about. Remove the word crossbow and add recurve, stick or compound bow


Or gun? 




JDMiller said:


> .....how much difference does it really make.


Its BOWseason. 
It makes a difference.


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> . . . and just for the record, I wouldn't have responded if you hadn't dragged me back into this by suggesting that the survey must've been legally kosher or else I would've filed a lawsuit. You might want to remember that I don't publicly post everything I know, Ace.
> 
> SB 211 would have resulted in complete closure on the xbow issue. I know you weren't happy that the UCBK was left out of the "compromise" process, but the UCBK had maybe 10 resident members at the time (the balance consisted of Canadians and other non-residents that Wille enlisted from the Excalibur xbow forum). That's not very representative and may have been a reason why Commissioner Gassett chose not to call you guys. Once the deal was struck and SB 211 was withdrawn, there was absolutely no reason to address these other issues which were known by basically everyone (except, of course, you). So, please stop suggesting that the lack of a lawsuit somehow lends credibility to your argument that KDFWR's separate bankroll somehow exempts them from Ky's governing statutes.


atta boy Ballard:wink: :wink: :wink:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Or gun?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its BOWseason.
> It makes a difference.



No source, its archery season and only fools claim crossbows aren't part of archery


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Now I ask you....... Is'nt this a example of what its about. Remove the word crossbow and add recurve, stick or compound bow.....how much difference does it really make. Does it really matter if you raised the crossbow or drew your compound.....the outcome, traditions and overall experience is the same. Hunting takes on several forms but in the end it's a individuals personal experiences that matters the most. How did my hunting with a crossbow really impact your hunting or your experiences? To answer that....it did'nt. Sometimes we need to be reminded of that.
> 
> Nice story, and I would guess it really happened, just that way. It makes no difference, you could just as well had a rifle or ML in your hands. No one here wants to keep you from hunting, you can enjoy it all you want, just as no one here wants to stop gun hunters from having a blast when they are in the woods too. I have in the very long ago past had just such an experience hunting with a rifle, should I try to force my weapon of choice into archery just because I may enjoy rifle hunting?


rifles are firearms-are you that dense to not understand that crossbows are archery weapons, rifles are not?


----------



## JDMiller

Free Range said:


> Nice story, and I would guess it really happened, just that way. It makes no difference, you could just as well had a rifle or ML in your hands. No one here wants to keep you from hunting, you can enjoy it all you want, just as no one here wants to stop gun hunters from having a blast when they are in the woods too. I have in the very long ago past had just such an experience hunting with a rifle, should I try to force my weapon of choice into archery just because I may enjoy rifle hunting?


Actually..... this was about 6 years ago and I was packing a Jennings Buckmaster. Last season was the first time I ever used a crossbow. I changed it to crossbow primarily to get my point across and get a few of ya'lls attention. I agree the same sentiment could have been with a firearm. I've got a lot of fond memories that way as well. I'm not going to argue the comparisons to crossbows to vertical bows. However they are not guns and honestly are their own animal with more akin to archery than anything you could compare them to. 

I support crossbows having their place.... if its archery season .... thats up for each state to decide. In Kentucky.... thats been decided. In enough time they will be common place and we will wonder what all the fuss was about. 

What my post was about ..... was a real hunting experience. It seems sometimes we get so obcessed with the "politics" of it ....we forget what were fighting for or against. To a point we almost act like were animal rights activist. The survey, opposition, politician involvement ......does'nt mean jack if it means doing damage to the sport we love. Whats done is done and its here for us to enjoy. 

Ky. Mustang made a valid point that we discussed here a few pages back....we need more huntable ground.....I agree and we need more new hunters....we need to watch each user groups back. Comments were made that the pro guys were against bowhunters....thats really off base. All the guys I know that supported this either were or still vertical bow users. A few of them like Jim C. & Willie have probably forgot more about archery over the years then I will ever know in a lifetime. They deserve respect and have it from me. I've met several on the opposing end of this.... they are good people with a different opinion. I've had key leaders of the opposing groups tell me flat out .....they are not against crossbows but the way this was being handled. I believe them. Thats what this ordeal in Kentucky was really about. At the end of the day...I would be happy to drink a cup & talk hunting with them anytime.

I hold no grudges.... I'll admit I may be a little smarter for getting a real life lesson through this ordeal... but I dont think it does the sport any good to dwell on certain things. I love to hunt and thats not going to change. I love archery and think crossbows have their place with vertical bow users. I have delt with lots of issues related to sportsmen but this takes the cake for some of the debates that have went on. 

I just think every once in awhile you need to take a hard look at the direction your trying to go in. You might be suprised what you find out about yourself along the way as well.


----------



## spec

Some valid points JD. I am glad to see that you are at least listening to what the "other" side is trying to say, esp about the "how it was handled". Several months ago the good afcdoc laid out a plan on how to handle the situation in the future and how best for the pro-side to act, yet a vocal few continue down the very path he urged them not to take. It certainly makes it easy to take the opposong side when you have one loudmouthed loose cannon shoving his opinion down everyones throat. Perhaps it would be in the best interest of the UKCB to cut your membership by one(for the good of the group) and move on.


----------



## Marvin

JDMiller said:


> Actually..... this was about 6 years ago and I was packing a Jennings Buckmaster. Last season was the first time I ever used a crossbow. I changed it to crossbow primarily to get my point across and get a few of ya'lls attention. I agree the same sentiment could have been with a firearm. I've got a lot of fond memories that way as well. I'm not going to argue the comparisons to crossbows to vertical bows. However they are not guns and honestly are their own animal with more akin to archery than anything you could compare them to.
> 
> I support crossbows having their place.... if its archery season .... thats up for each state to decide. In Kentucky.... thats been decided. In enough time they will be common place and we will wonder what all the fuss was about.
> 
> What my post was about ..... was a real hunting experience. It seems sometimes we get so obcessed with the "politics" of it ....we forget what were fighting for or against. To a point we almost act like were animal rights activist. The survey, opposition, politician involvement ......does'nt mean jack if it means doing damage to the sport we love. Whats done is done and its here for us to enjoy.
> 
> Ky. Mustang made a valid point that we discussed here a few pages back....we need more huntable ground.....I agree and we need more new hunters....we need to watch each user groups back. Comments were made that the pro guys were against bowhunters....thats really off base. All the guys I know that supported this either were or still vertical bow users. A few of them like Jim C. & Willie have probably forgot more about archery over the years then I will ever know in a lifetime. They deserve respect and have it from me. I've met several on the opposing end of this.... they are good people with a different opinion. I've had key leaders of the opposing groups tell me flat out .....they are not against crossbows but the way this was being handled. I believe them. Thats what this ordeal in Kentucky was really about. At the end of the day...I would be happy to drink a cup & talk hunting with them anytime.
> 
> I hold no grudges.... I'll admit I may be a little smarter for getting a real life lesson through this ordeal... but I dont think it does the sport any good to dwell on certain things. I love to hunt and thats not going to change. I love archery and think crossbows have their place with vertical bow users. I have delt with lots of issues related to sportsmen but this takes the cake for some of the debates that have went on.
> 
> I just think every once in awhile you need to take a hard look at the direction your trying to go in. You might be suprised what you find out about yourself along the way as well.



If everyone from your side would act and be honest like you are, Then heck I would even consider supporting your side within reason. Good Post JD. I like spec's idea too. :wink: this whole threateneing to sue people crossed lines I could not even fathom ever being crossed. I do not hold the UCBK responsible for this one members actions either. Question for you if you don;t mind and it may help other states in this situation, Did the KDF&W try to get the oppsoing people on board first to be sure the survey was in an acceptable format so no questions like this could be brought up? Seems the best course would be to get everyone to teh table initially and say were going to do this, you can either be involved and help out or step out of the way. That would have gone a long way I think in stopping the silly sniping.


----------



## Free Range

JD, you are completely right on, it is about hunting, and all of us here can relate to your story. And as I and others have said, we are not against the xb, we just don’t believe it belongs in the same season as the bow. Jennings Buckmaster, I take it that is a compound? What is the real answer? Who knows, I’m sure in the coming years there will be plenty of opportunity to find out where the xb fits in. 



> It certainly makes it easy to take the opposong side when you have one loudmouthed loose cannon shoving his opinion down everyones throat. Perhaps it would be in the best interest of the UKCB to cut your membership by one(for the good of the group) and move on.


Here, here, now that there is funny,,,,hmmm I wonder whom you may be referring to???


----------



## JDMiller

Marvin said:


> If everyone from your side would act and be honest like you are, Then heck I would even consider supporting your side within reason. Good Post JD. I like spec's idea too. :wink: this whole threateneing to sue people crossed lines I could not even fathom ever being crossed. I do not hold the UCBK responsible for this one members actions either. Question for you if you don;t mind and it may help other states in this situation, Did the KDF&W try to get the oppsoing people on board first to be sure the survey was in an acceptable format so no questions like this could be brought up? Seems the best course would be to get everyone to teh table initially and say were going to do this, you can either be involved and help out or step out of the way. That would have gone a long way I think in stopping the silly sniping.


Marvin.... Thanks for the comments and to answer your question .....I came in on this after the expansion was resended in June of 2005. In March of 2005 when this was first voted on by the KDF&WR Commission.... a survey that was performed in 1999(not real sure of the date) was used for public sentiment. Those that were opposed believed the wording of the questions were mis-leading and it was a point of controversy. This survey showed support just as the second one did. Sometime after June ....the KDF&WR in a press release stated they were going to get a independent party to perform another survey. They contracted with Cornell and as far as I know..... no one from our side or the oposing side was ever brought to the table to review the question or formatting before it was performed. 

The results of the survey were released in November.... during the second meeting ("round table discussion") where supporting & opposing groups were brought together by the KDF&WR. In my opinion these discussions should have been held earlier...and hindsight now tells us now.....there was a lot of things that should have been done differently. The survey is...."what it is" and I will go out on a limb and say if you done another one tommorrow and UK handled it...... we would have the same or very similar results. The lines are very split in the states hunting community. Not all bowhunters are against it and on the otherside of the coin....... not all of the remaining user groups are for it. In the end..... I think the percentage that really does not care either way.....would be the deciding factor. 

If you look at all the events that led to this compromise.....What we had was a small group fighting for it and another group....slightly larger..but still small fighting against it.....either way it does not reflect the opinion of the entire hunting community and the strictly firearms user being the largest group of all. I believe archery hunters play a major roll in the big picture of things but they are not a huge factor in wildlife management. KDF&WR.... to control deer heards can kill more deer with a two day muzzleloader hunt then in all of 4 months of archery season. If you combine crossbows into general archery.....then you begin creating a useful combination to the game departments..... especially in urban areas where firearms is not the wisest choice. How each state wants to incorporate the two.....depends on what kind of management it needs.

Now I also want to make another statement....... The UCBK has some very passionate individuals concerning this issue....just as those opposed do as well. Theres even a few that really dont belong to either group that have made comments that have kept the pot stirred . These individuals ....all the way around the table....are neither right nor wrong. If you take Ace..... he has been dealing with this a lot longer than I have. His statements come from his own beliefs and he has a lot of time invested on this issue as well as others. This particular issue can bring out your best and worst in attitudes and opinions but he has a right to his opinion...... just as the rest of us do and have made clear throughout this ordeal. I'm glad he is on our side and not fighting against us. He has stepped to the plate on a lot of issues concerning sportsmen and has played a lot of behind the scene rolls that have made the difference. It does'nt hurt to stop and listen to what someone has to say on both sides of this..... you might learn something.

I'm done with this thread guys...theres not much left that has'nt been said.... glad ya'll listened to what I had to say. 


Free Range..... Jennings Buckmaster......compound.


----------



## Marvin

JDMiller said:


> Marvin.... Thanks for the comments and to answer your question .....I came in on this after the expansion was resended in June of 2005. In March of 2005 when this was first voted on by the KDF&WR Commission.... a survey that was performed in 1999(not real sure of the date) was used for public sentiment. Those that were opposed believed the wording of the questions were mis-leading and it was a point of controversy. This survey showed support just as the second one did. Sometime after June ....the KDF&WR in a press release stated they were going to get a independent party to perform another survey. They contracted with Cornell and as far as I know..... no one from our side or the oposing side was ever brought to the table to review the question or formatting before it was performed.
> 
> The results of the survey were released in November.... during the second meeting ("round table discussion") where supporting & opposing groups were brought together by the KDF&WR. In my opinion these discussions should have been held earlier...and hindsight now tells us now.....there was a lot of things that should have been done differently. The survey is...."what it is" and I will go out on a limb and say if you done another one tommorrow and UK handled it...... we would have the same or very similar results. The lines are very split in the states hunting community. Not all bowhunters are against it and on the otherside of the coin....... not all of the remaining user groups are for it. In the end..... I think the percentage that really does not care either way.....would be the deciding factor.
> 
> If you look at all the events that led to this compromise.....What we had was a small group fighting for it and another group....slightly larger..but still small fighting against it.....either way it does not reflect the opinion of the entire hunting community and the strictly firearms user being the largest group of all. I believe archery hunters play a major roll in the big picture of things but they are not a huge factor in wildlife management. KDF&WR.... to control deer heards can kill more deer with a two day muzzleloader hunt then in all of 4 months of archery season. If you combine crossbows into general archery.....then you begin creating a useful combination to the game departments..... especially in urban areas where firearms is not the wisest choice. How each state wants to incorporate the two.....depends on what kind of management it needs.
> 
> Now I also want to make another statement....... The UCBK has some very passionate individuals concerning this issue....just as those opposed do as well. Theres even a few that really dont belong to either group that have made comments that have kept the pot stirred . These individuals ....all the way around the table....are neither right nor wrong. If you take Ace..... he has been dealing with this a lot longer than I have. His statements come from his own beliefs and he has a lot of time invested on this issue as well as others. This particular issue can bring out your best and worst in attitudes and opinions but he has a right to his opinion...... just as the rest of us do and have made clear throughout this ordeal. I'm glad he is on our side and not fighting against us. He has stepped to the plate on a lot of issues concerning sportsmen and has played a lot of behind the scene rolls that have made the difference. It does'nt hurt to stop and listen to what someone has to say on both sides of this..... you might learn something.
> 
> I'm done with this thread guys...theres not much left that has'nt been said.... glad ya'll listened to what I had to say.
> 
> 
> Free Range..... Jennings Buckmaster......compound.



Thank you JD. I am just Glad ACE is not the poster boy for your organization. You represent them well i might add.


----------



## Free Range

Free Range..... Jennings Buckmaster......compound.

I thought so , I don't keep up with the high tech crowd much.


----------



## LoweBow

Jim C said:


> No source, its archery season and only fools claim crossbows aren't part of archery



Ky Law is very clear as to what is and isn't archery equipment.
Here's the copy I recieved while helping draft the statutes.

301 KAR 2:172. Deer hunting seasons and requirements.

RELATES TO: KRS 150.010, 150.170, 150.175, 150.180, 150.340, 150.360, 150.370, 150.390, 150.395, 150.990
STATUTORY AUTHORITY: 150.025(1)
NECESSITY, FUNCTION, AND CONFORMITY: KRS 150.025 grants the department authority to establish hunting seasons, bag limits, methods of taking and other matters necessary to carry out the purpose of KRS Chapter 150. This administrative regulation establishes deer hunting seasons, prescribes legal methods of taking and establishes tagging and checking requirements for deer hunting.

Section 1. Definitions. (1) "Adult" means an individual who is at least eighteen (18) years of age.
(2) "Antlered deer" means a deer with a visible antler protruding above the hairline.
(3) "Antlerless deer" means a deer with no visible antler protruding above the hairline, including female deer and male fawns (button bucks).
*(4) "Archery equipment" means a long bow, recurve bow or compound bow incapable of holding an arrow at full or partial draw without aid from the archer.* 
(5) "Arrow" means the projectile fired from a bow or crossbow.
(6) "Barbed broadhead" means a point or portion of a blade projecting backward from a broadhead designed to hold an arrow within an animal.
(7) "Bonus antlerless permit" means a permit which, in conjunction with appropriate licenses and permits, seasons and methods, allows the holder to take two (2) additional antlerless deer.
*(8) "Crossbow" means a bow designed or fitted with a device to hold an arrow at full or partial draw without aid from the archer.* 
(9) "Deer" means a member of the species Odocoileus virginianus.
(10) "Firearm" means a breech or muzzle-loading rifle, shotgun or handgun.
(11) "Fully-automatic firearm" means a firearm which fires more than one (1) time with a single pull of the trigger.
(12) "License year" means the period from March 1 through the following last day of February.
(13) "Modern gun" means a rifle, handgun or shotgun which is loaded from the rear of the barrel.
(14) "Muzzle-loading gun" means a rifle, shotgun or handgun which is loaded from the discharging end of the barrel or discharging end of the cylinder.
(15) "Shotshell" means ammunition containing more than one (1) projectile.
(16) "Statewide deer permit" means a permit, which, in conjunction with appropriate licenses, seasons, and methods, allows the holder to take one (1) either-sex deer and one (1) antlerless-only deer.
(17) "Zone" means the grouping of counties as stipulated in 301 KAR 2:174, Deer hunting zones.
(18) "Youth" means a person under the age of sixteen (16) by the date of the hunt.

Section 2. License and Deer Permit Requirements. (1) Unless exempted by KRS 150.170, a person hunting deer shall have proof of purchase of a valid Kentucky hunting license and valid deer permit while hunting.
(2) In lieu of a statewide deer permit, a person possessing a valid junior statewide hunting license may use no more than two (2) junior deer hunting permits. No more than one (1) permit shall be used for taking an antlered deer.
(3) Unless exempted by KRS 150.170, a person hunting wild hogs or coyotes during a season or Wildlife Management Area hunt where a firearm is allowed for deer hunting, shall have proof of purchase of a valid Kentucky hunting license and valid deer permit.
(4) A person whose name does not appear on a license or permit shall not use that license or permit to harvest deer.
(5) Unless exempted by KRS 150.170, bonus antlerless permits shall not be valid unless accompanied by a valid Kentucky hunting license and statewide deer permit.

Section 3. Hunter Restrictions. (1) A deer hunter:
(a) May be in the woods or stands before or after daylight hours, but shall not take deer except during daylight hours;
(b) Shall not use dogs, except he or she may use leashed tracking dogs to recover wounded deer;
(c) Shall not take swimming deer; and
(d) Shall not take deer from a vehicle, boat, or while on horseback, except that a hunter in possession of a disabled hunting exemption permit issued by the department may use a stationary vehicle as a hunting platform.
(2) A deer hunter shall not take a deer with any device except a firearm, crossbow or archery equipment.
(3) A deer hunter shall not use or possess while deer hunting:
(a) Rimfire ammunition;
(b) A fully-automatic firearm;
(c) A firearm with a magazine capacity greater than ten (10) rounds;
(d) Steel-jacketed ammunition;
(e) Tracer bullet ammunition;
(f) A shotshell containing larger than number two (2) size shot;
(g) A broadhead smaller than seven-eighths (7/8) inch wide;
(h) A barbed broadhead;
(i) A crossbow without a working safety device;
(j) A chemically-treated arrow; or
(k) An arrow with a chemical attachment.
(4) Persons hunting deer shall not carry a firearm, except when a firearms deer season is open.

Section 4. Hunter Orange Clothing Requirements. (1) During the modern gun deer season, muzzle-loader season or the youth firearm season, a person hunting any species, and any person accompanying a hunter, shall display solid, unbroken hunter orange visible from all sides on the head, back and chest.
(2) During the elk firearm season, a person hunting any species, and any person accompanying a hunter within the sixteen (16) county elk zone, shall display solid, unbroken hunter orange visible from all sides on the head, back, and chest.
(3) These requirements shall not apply to a person:
(a) Hunting waterfowl; or
(b) Hunting at night.
(4) The hunter orange portions of a garment worn to fulfill the requirements of this section:
(a) May display a small section of another color; and
(b) Shall not have mesh weave openings exceeding one-fourth (1/4) inch by any measurement.
(5) A camouflage pattern hunter orange garment worn without additional solid hunter orange on the head, back and chest shall not meet the requirements of this section.

Section 5. Statewide Season Dates. (1) A deer hunter may use archery equipment statewide from the first Saturday in September through the third Monday in January.
(2) A deer hunter may take deer with a modern firearm statewide beginning the second Saturday in November:
(a) For sixteen (16) consecutive days in Zones 1 and 2; and
(b) For ten (10) consecutive days in Zones 3 and 4.
(3) A deer hunter may use a muzzle-loading gun statewide:
(a) For two (2) consecutive days beginning the third Saturday in October;
(b) For nine (9) consecutive days beginning the second Saturday in December; and
(c) During any season when a modern gun may be used to take deer.
(4) A deer hunter may use a crossbow statewide:
(a) From October 1 through the end of the third full weekend in October;
(b) From the second Saturday in November through December 31; and
(c) During any season when a firearm may be used to take deer.
(5) Youth firearms season. For two (2) consecutive days beginning on the second Saturday in October, a youth may take antlered or antlerless deer with a firearm.
(6) [(5)] [(6)] Free youth weekend. For two (2) consecutive days beginning on the Saturday after Christmas, a youth may hunt deer without a hunting license or deer permit. Statewide bag limits and harvest-reporting requirements shall apply.

Section 6. Season and Zone Limits. (1) Except as provided in 301 KAR 2:178, 301 KAR 2:111 and 301 KAR 2:176, in a license year, a person shall not take more than:
(a) One (1) antlered deer;
(b) The number of antlerless deer permitted in the zones specified in subsections (2) and (3) of this section; or
(c) The total number of deer permitted in the zones specified in subsections (2) and (3) of this section.
(2) In zone 1, a person may take an unlimited number of antlerless deer, provided that the person has purchased the appropriate bonus antlerless permits.
(3) In zones 2, 3 and 4, a person may take a total number of four (4) deer, provided that the person has purchased the appropriate bonus antlerless permits.
(4) Legal weapons. A person shall take deer only with the weapons specified for each zone below:
(a) Zones 1 and 2. Deer may be taken with any weapon;
(b) Zone 3. Only two (2) deer may be taken with a firearm; and
(c) Zone 4.
1. Only two (2) deer may be taken with a firearm; and
2. Antlerless deer shall not be legal during the modern firearm season or the early muzzleloader season.

Section 7. Supervision of Youth Firearms Deer Hunters. (1) An adult shall:
(a) Accompany a person under sixteen (16) years old; and
(b) Remain in a position to take immediate control of the youth's firearm.
(2) An adult accompanying a youth hunter shall not be required to possess a hunting license or deer permit if the adult is not hunting.
(3) An adult accompanying a youth during the youth firearm season shall not carry a firearm.

Section 8. Harvest Recording. Immediately after taking a deer, a person shall:
(1) Record, in writing, the species, date taken, county where taken, and sex of the deer before moving the carcass from the site where taken. This information shall be logged and registered on one (1) of the following:
(a) Hunter’s log section on the reverse side of a license or permit;
(b) Hunter's log produced in a hunting guide;
(c) Hunter’s log printed from the Internet;
(d) Hunter’s log available from any KDSS agent; or
(e) An index card or reasonable facsimile thereof; and
(2) Retain the completed hunter’s log in his possession whenever the hunter is in the field during the current season.

Section 9. Checking a Deer. (1) A person shall check a harvested deer by:
(a) Calling the toll free number listed in the current fall hunting and trapping guide on the day the deer is harvested;
(b) Providing the information requested by the automated check-in system; and
(c) Writing the confirmation number given by the system on the hunter's log described in Section 8 of this administrative regulation.
(2) If a harvested deer leaves the possession of a hunter, the hunter shall attach a hand-made tag, which contains the confirmation number, hunter’s name, and a phone number, to the carcass.
(3) A person shall not knowingly provide false information when completing the hunter’s log, checking a deer, or creating a carcass tag.

Section 10. Transporting and Processing Deer. (1) A person shall:
(a) Not transport an unchecked deer out of Kentucky;
(b) Have proof that a deer or parts of deer brought into Kentucky were legally taken;
(c) Not submit deer taken outside Kentucky or in violation of any governing statute or administrative regulation for a state or national trophy deer listing; and
(d) Not sell deer hides except to a licensed:
1. Fur buyer;
2. Fur processor; or
3. Taxidermist.
(2) A taxidermist or other individual who commercially butchers deer shall:
(a) Not accept deer carcasses or any part of a deer without a proper carcass tag described in Section 9 of this administrative regulation.
(b) Keep accurate records of the hunter's name, address, confirmation number, and date received for each deer in his possession, and retain such records for a period of one (1) year.

Dr. JONATHAN GASSETT, Commissioner
GEORGE WARD, Secretary
APPROVED BY AGENCY January 11, 2006
FILED WITH LRC: January 12, 2006 at 11 a.m.
CONTACT PERSON; Cara Jarrell, Assistant Counsel, Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, Arnold L. Mitchell Building, #1 Sportsman's Lane, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601, phone (502) 564-3400, fax (502) 564-0506.


----------



## Jim C

lots of words-not much value. In Ohio a 35 pound olympic target bow is not legal hunting equipment-that hardly establishes that such a bow is not a bow or not archery equipment

understand?


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> lots of words-not much value. In Ohio a 35 pound olympic target bow is not legal hunting equipment-that hardly establishes that such a bow is not a bow or not archery equipment
> 
> understand?


You have to admit he got you there Jim. :mg: :wink:


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> Some valid points JD. I am glad to see that you are at least listening to what the "other" side is trying to say, esp about the "how it was handled". Several months ago the good afcdoc laid out a plan on how to handle the situation in the future and how best for the pro-side to act, yet a vocal few continue down the very path he urged them not to take. It certainly makes it easy to take the opposong side when you have one loudmouthed loose cannon shoving his opinion down everyones throat. Perhaps it would be in the best interest of the UKCB to cut your membership by one(for the good of the group) and move on.


I agree, great posts JD!

JD knows I have more than listened to the "other side" and in fact have agreed to many of the points they've made, it was the "other side" who wouldn't listen NOR try to work together to find an acceptable end to this, and of that fact there is no way to dispute that fact ....at least not honestly...


That's too funny ! It WAS important to so many of you HOW it was done, yet you fail to see the latter things done greatly surpass ANY of the "tactics" used in the first "go-around"(one reason why I fought for compromise so hard was because I seen and realized the HOW was a valid point)......for just one example going on the radio talk show with pure misinformation and some could easily maintain lies about the "circumvention of the process by the KDFWR which never even occured and the Regs were filed much earlier than required by law, YET Ballard and Co. said they had not been! 

Since it's pretty well "laid out " in this thread, I won't continue to prove it, fact IS: IF anyone is "concerned" about HOW things are done (no matter what they are or which "side" you're on) then it ALL matters.........I've agreed mistakes were made on both sides (and again I have made more than my share myself fwiw).....

The real questions are:

Were the lessons learned here in KY and will they be elsewhere,

Will we from opposing "sides" be able to continue to work together as in the past, on other much more important issues and put this all behind us??


Marvin:

I've tried to not answer you on this because it's "old news" and I have apologized several times to YOU ......

I've apologized all I intend to do..........IF you're NOT man enough to accept it, keep bringing up the "old stuff", had YOU not lied about the UCBK and continued to do so,(after being told several times you were wrong)..... it would have never happened YOU have not to this point even apologized for your lies and unfounded attacks on the UCBK(and anyone can see you're a "Proud NonMember" )......at any rate after just losing my Father,(and being the one who found him dead no less)... 

I guess my "stress levels" and emotions were a bit high(major understatement) and AGAIN, I over reacted........I am after all only human......NOT a good excuse for my actions but at least it's true.... and everyone has seen my apology so it's no secret, the fact you continue to bring it up after the apology imho says a great deal about you ......I even said IF I could delete it I would gladly do so......I couldn't I have no idea what else one would expect.......


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> You have to admit he got you there Jim. :mg: :wink:



not at all-I said only fools would classify crossbows as not being part of archery. I stand by what I said and I noted the Ohio code. Its obvious the law talks about legal hunting tackle not the wider universe of "archery" equpment. The law should say "legal archery season equipment"

I can't help it if lawmakers are ignorant of terms-after all congress called common sporting firearms "assault weapons" in a federal law even though not a single recognized firearms expert ever used that term since it was a dreamed up name made to demonize certain semi autos


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin:
> 
> I've tried to not answer you on this because it's "old news" and I have apologized several times to YOU ......
> 
> I've apologized all I intend to do..........IF you're NOT man enough to accept it, keep bringing up the "old stuff", had YOU not lied about the UCBK and continued to do so,(after being told several times you were wrong)..... it would have never happened YOU have not to this point even apologized for your lies and unfounded attacks on the UCBK(and anyone can see you're a "Proud NonMember" )......at any rate after just losing my Father,(and being the one who found him dead no less)...
> 
> I guess my "stress levels" and emotions were a bit high(major understatement) and AGAIN, I over reacted........I am after all only human......NOT a good excuse for my actions but at least it's true.... and everyone has seen my apology so it's no secret, the fact you continue to bring it up after the apology imho says a great deal about you ......I even said IF I could delete it I would gladly do so......I couldn't I have no idea what else one would expect.......


Ah well here we are again. Ace with worthless fodder material as usual. Don't you know the golden rule in communication slick? Your first response in a heated arguement is usually you "true feelings". It speaks volumes about people and their personalities. Do you think if you walk up to a black man on teh street and call him the N-word he is going "Really" accept your apology? Same here. You want some noah's ark to save an unite all these sportsman but your not even smart enough to read what you type and realize its intent. People like you chastise me for holding a grudge ( not accepting your half hearted apology) after a deliberate attempt to threaten me. Your not holding a grudge against the ubk are you ace? ( please spare us the 2 paragraphs of nonsense on how much you respect them cause it AIN'T true). I am in bewilderment of Mr millers involvement with you to say the least. In reality your just a blip on the radar compared to what Jim and I have been through and I can say for a fact I would hunt and shoot with Jim any day. You don't respect anyone ,anywhere or at anytime. That chip on your shoulders going to cost you one day since you continually fail to know the difference bewteen a dissagreement and crossing the line.


----------



## aceoky

Whatever Marvin: believe whatever you'd like, I honestly don't care at all, fact is, YOU say it was and is "half -hearted" you're wrong, deal with it.....at least I'm man enought to admit I was wrong and apologize, you aren't and haven't.......end of story.....JD knows me much better than you do, though you speak as IF you know me, when in fact you couldn't be more wrong....

I'm done with you on this.........YOU won't accept my sincere apology, that's your right, I suppose, nothing I can do about it now, even though YOU won't accept the fact it was at least in part your fault for keeping up your misinformation on the UCBK (to be nice about what you did in fact do).....You were told what you were saying was false and easily proven so, you kept right on as IF it were true, no big deal, since again it's very easily proven......you're more than welcome to your opinion of me, gladly, most who know me (even from the internet, KNOW me better than the false way you've tried to "paint " me.....)

BTW Marvin, for the record "my first response" was " your information is flawed to say the least, PLEASE refrain from trashing the UCBK with false information, thank you"(that's very close if not verbatem btw).....so much for that "theory" fwiw

Doesn't really matter NOW< -------- JD has posted the REAL membership and the FACTS on the matter(which btw confirm exactly what I said), had some NOT believed everything they think they know (and from internet forums as their sources, no less) none of this would have occured.....

MUst be nice to be like you Marvin and NEVER make human mistakes  or let your pent up emotions from a VERY trying time get the better of you......


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> not at all-I said only fools would classify crossbows as not being part of archery. I stand by what I said and I noted the Ohio code. Its obvious the law talks about legal hunting tackle not the wider universe of "archery" equpment. The law should say "legal archery season equipment


 I think what you are worried about is covered here Jim.

NECESSITY, FUNCTION, AND CONFORMITY: KRS 150.025 grants the department authority to establish hunting seasons, bag limits, methods of taking and other matters necessary to carry out the purpose of KRS Chapter 150. This administrative regulation establishes deer hunting seasons, prescribes legal methods of taking and establishes tagging and checking requirements for deer hunting.


Did I read somewhere you graduated from Cornell?


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Whatever Marvin: believe whatever you'd like, I honestly don't care at all, fact is, YOU say it was and is "half -hearted" you're wrong, deal with it.....at least I'm man enought to admit I was wrong and apologize, you aren't and haven't.......end of story.....JD knows me much better than you do, though you speak as IF you know me, when in fact you couldn't be more wrong....
> 
> I'm done with you on this.........YOU won't accept my sincere apology, that's your right, I suppose, nothing I can do about it now, even though YOU won't accept the fact it was at least in part your fault for keeping up your misinformation on the UCBK (to be nice about what you did in fact do).....You were told what you were saying was false and easily proven so, you kept right on as IF it were true, no big deal, since again it's very easily proven......you're more than welcome to your opinion of me, gladly, most who know me (even from the internet, KNOW me better than the false way you've tried to "paint " me.....)
> 
> BTW Marvin, for the record "my first response" was " your information is flawed to say the least, PLEASE refrain from trashing the UCBK with false information, thank you"(that's very close if not verbatem btw).....so much for that "theory" fwiw
> 
> MUst be nice to be like you Marvin and NEVER make human mistakes  or let your pent up emotions from a VERY trying time get the better of you......



oh believe me ace, emotions do get the best of me at times. I just not dumb enough to threaten people or let alone post them in an open forum.. its called rational thinking and understanding what your typing ( your biggest struggle by far). you keep said I lied abotu things but NEVER provided any information other than saying I was wrong and you were right. Hardly credible when you have an out of stater saying "yes we got your application , thanks" Must be a lot of liars on the excalibur sight if all of them said they sent in the money to support you and they didn't ( yeah right)


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I think what you are worried about is covered here Jim.
> 
> NECESSITY, FUNCTION, AND CONFORMITY: KRS 150.025 grants the department authority to establish hunting seasons, bag limits, methods of taking and other matters necessary to carry out the purpose of KRS Chapter 150. This administrative regulation establishes deer hunting seasons, prescribes legal methods of taking and establishes tagging and checking requirements for deer hunting.
> 
> 
> Did I read somewhere you graduated from Cornell?



when you make a point let me know-I don't see any right now and its obvious you didn't quite understand the direction of this part of the thread. I have two degrees from Cornell and one from Yale since you seem so interested.


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> when you make a point let me know-I don't see any right now and its obvious you didn't quite understand the direction of this part of the thread. I have two degrees from Cornell and one from Yale since you seem so interested.


2 from Cornell ...my goodness I don't want to see yoru student loan bill.  Hey is one of those degrees would happen to be in hunting Phone Surveys would it? I AM JUST KIDDING JIM!! just though of a funny and had to say it:cocktail: :wink: don't be mad....just trying to lighten the mood


----------



## aceoky

Marvin, I didn't realize reading comprehension was your weakest point by far, again JD posted up the FACTS on the matter(which also confirm what I tried to tell you, you didnt' listen then, you really should now; facts carry MUCH more weight with most than your uninformed opinion OR BS posted on some forums......WE know our membership, clearly YOU do not).....no need for me to repost them or to show you........fact you were wrong, it's posted here for you and everyone to see......end of story, and I'm done with the matter......like it or not, doesn't matter to me in the least

I don't have any problem with you; obviously that is not the case for you in regards to me....I can accept that and manage to live with it as well.

At least *I* CAN admit to making mistakes........


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> when you make a point let me know-I don't see any right now and its obvious you didn't quite understand the direction of this part of the thread. I have two degrees from Cornell and one from Yale since you seem so interested.


 The title of this thread is "In Ky" not ohio:wink: .So you think there should be a law that defines your target practice equipment. I guess you will have to search the KRS website yourself to find that. We are talking about deer hunting regulations. Since you have a few degrees tell us how that regulation mis represents a crossbow.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> The title of this thread is "In Ky" not ohio:wink: .So you think there should be a law that defines your target practice equipment. I guess you will have to search the KRS website yourself to find that. We are talking about deer hunting regulations. Since you have a few degrees tell us how that regulation mis represents a crossbow.



I think you are trying to create an argument for the sake of arguing and its obvious you didn't understand the earlier points


----------



## thesource

KY MUSTANG said:


> The title of this thread is "In Ky" not ohio:wink: .So you think there should be a law that defines your target practice equipment. I guess you will have to search the KRS website yourself to find that. We are talking about deer hunting regulations. Since you have a few degrees tell us how that regulation mis represents a crossbow.


Hey Mustang, want to hear an interesting fact?

Even OHIO has a different and separate definition of bow and crossbow! 

They may allow them, but they understand that they are different. Isn't that ironic?:wink:


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> I think you are trying to create an argument for the sake of arguing and its obvious you didn't understand the earlier points


 I am not not trying to create an argument. I am telling you that ky regulation is very truthful about what a crossbow is, there is nothing false there. You just want to change the subject over to olympic style shooting debate on what they classify archery as. I bet they have some rules about using broadheads and such, sights on traditional bows, etc.
Now tell us how the Ky regulation incorrectly defines what a crossbow is.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I am not not trying to create an argument. I am telling you that ky regulation is very truthful about what a crossbow is, there is nothing false there. You just want to change the subject over to olympic style shooting debate on what they classify archery as. I bet they have some rules about using broadheads and such, sights on traditional bows, etc.
> Now tell us how the Ky regulation incorrectly defines what a crossbow is.


Again that wasn't the point
I note that any state that classifies a crossbow differently than a compound for the purposes of deer or similar game is engaging in what I consider stupidity.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> Again that wasn't the point
> I note that any state that classifies a crossbow differently than a compound for the purposes of deer or similar game is engaging in what I consider stupidity.


That is your opinion and everyone has one. The reg is what matters to the co and the judge. :darkbeer: :cocktail: :zip:


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> That is your opinion and everyone has one. The reg is what matters to the co and the judge. :darkbeer: :cocktail: :zip:



and if you examine the reasons behind the apartheid you almost always will find lies and disinformation. no one on this forum has yet to come up with a rational argument for the separation based on sound reasons

if they could you all wouldn't still be spewing "drawing in the presence of game" or how the bow looks


----------



## Free Range

And no one on this forum (or any where else for that matter) has come up with a rational reason to include them. If they had people wouldn't be spewing words like apartheid.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> and if you examine the reasons behind the apartheid you almost always will find lies and disinformation. no one on this forum has yet to come up with a rational argument for the separation based on sound reasons
> 
> if they could you all wouldn't still be spewing "drawing in the presence of game" or how the bow looks


Again this is just your opinion, you have no facts. The regulation is fact whether you like it or not.
I could say a crossbow is far more likely to fire than a percussion cap muzzeloader especially on a rainy day, or will your crossbow sweat and not fire like a muzzeloader will. 
The truth is they are not the same and the reg is straight forward about it.:violin:
Maybe Ace won't mind me using his word "facts" lol


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin, I didn't realize reading comprehension was your weakest point by far, again JD posted up the FACTS on the matter(which also confirm what I tried to tell you, you didnt' listen then, you really should now; facts carry MUCH more weight with most than your uninformed opinion OR BS posted on some forums......WE know our membership, clearly YOU do not).....no need for me to repost them or to show you........fact you were wrong, it's posted here for you and everyone to see......end of story, and I'm done with the matter......like it or not, doesn't matter to me in the least
> 
> I don't have any problem with you; obviously that is not the case for you in regards to me....I can accept that and manage to live with it as well.
> 
> At least *I* CAN admit to making mistakes........


 admitting to some and not others does not get you a halo ace. i stand FIRMLY behind my statements until proven otherwise. Your word, well we all know how good that is. I figure your word and 50 cents should be able to get me a can of soda. Your never done with the matter ace. There that chip i mentioned. your spread your blather to anyone that listens and thats a fact. your written rants of other sites are too funny. Again...all we ahve to do is give you the rope and sit back and watch. Don't spain an ankle getting off that soap box.


----------



## Marvin

*Ace I found a PET for you.*

Found something that might be up your alley.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> And no one on this forum (or any where else for that matter) has come up with a rational reason to include them. If they had people wouldn't be spewing words like apartheid.



I noted before that those who whine about xbows try to impose burdens of proof on xbow advocates that were never imposed on compound advocates.

there is no rational reason for you to post on this forum either-fortunately for you that isn't the litmus test.


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> Found something that might be up your alley. I figured you could relate to it


giving new meaning two siamese cats?:wink:


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Again this is just your opinion, you have no facts. The regulation is fact whether you like it or not.
> I could say a crossbow is far more likely to fire than a percussion cap muzzeloader especially on a rainy day, or will your crossbow sweat and not fire like a muzzeloader will.
> The truth is they are not the same and the reg is straight forward about it.:violin:
> Maybe Ace won't mind me using his word "facts" lol


yeah you could say that and I would laugh at how stupid the analogy is


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> giving new meaning two siamese cats?:wink:


 :wink:


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> Marvin, I didn't realize reading comprehension was your weakest point by far, again JD posted up the FACTS on the matter(which also confirm what I tried to tell you, you didnt' listen then, you really should now; facts carry MUCH more weight with most than your uninformed opinion OR BS posted on some forums......WE know our membership, clearly YOU do not).....no need for me to repost them or to show you........fact you were wrong, it's posted here for you and everyone to see......end of story, and I'm done with the matter......like it or not, doesn't matter to me in the least
> 
> I don't have any problem with you; obviously that is not the case for you in regards to me....I can accept that and manage to live with it as well.
> 
> At least *I* CAN admit to making mistakes........


Ace - Here's what JDMiller posted on the Excalibur Xbow forum:

"Guys.....been awhile since I posted on here but I wanted to let everyone know how much the United Crossbow Hunters of Kentucky(UCBK) appreciated your support. When Woody asked for asistance...y'all steped up to the plate and gave us enough membership to be recconized as a legitimate club and have the voice needed to push for expansion . It also gave us membership into the LKS(League of Kentucky Sportsman) which gave us voting rights at the state meetings of this organization."

If you'd like I can post up the name and location of all those enlisted UCBK members that came from Canada or other faraway places.

Here's what Tom Conely (Secretary and Founder of UCBK) posted on your very own UCBK forum on March 19, 2006 after the "compromise" season was finalized:

"The simple fact is that we got snookered by the end run to the Legislature. That was something we didn't have an answer for. *We need more Ky. members*,and more input next time to legislators and Commissioners. If there is enough of each, we will win in the end, if not we won't."

And here's what you posted in response: "Multi , I agree with that, and I feel we're making steps toward that in the "right direction" with what we're now doing!"

So please spare us all this BS about how strong the UCBK is with resident KY hunters.


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> Ace - Here's what JDMiller posted on the Excalibur Xbow forum:
> 
> "Guys.....been awhile since I posted on here but I wanted to let everyone know how much the United Crossbow Hunters of Kentucky(UCBK) appreciated your support. When Woody asked for asistance...y'all steped up to the plate and gave us enough membership to be recconized as a legitimate club and have the voice needed to push for expansion . It also gave us membership into the LKS(League of Kentucky Sportsman) which gave us voting rights at the state meetings of this organization."
> 
> If you'd like I can post up the name and location of all those enlisted UCBK members that came from Canada or other faraway places.
> 
> Here's what Tom Conely (Secretary and Founder of UCBK) posted on your very own UCBK forum on March 19, 2006 after the "compromise" season was finalized:
> 
> "The simple fact is that we got snookered by the end run to the Legislature. That was something we didn't have an answer for. *We need more Ky. members*,and more input next time to legislators and Commissioners. If there is enough of each, we will win in the end, if not we won't."
> 
> And here's what you posted in response: "Multi , I agree with that, and I feel we're making steps toward that in the "right direction" with what we're now doing!"
> 
> So please spare us all this BS about how strong the UCBK is with resident KY hunters.


:RockOn: :banana: :banana:


----------



## thesource

ballard said:


> Ace - Here's what JDMiller posted on the Excalibur Xbow forum:
> 
> "Guys.....been awhile since I posted on here but I wanted to let everyone know how much the United Crossbow Hunters of Kentucky(UCBK) appreciated your support. When Woody asked for asistance...y'all steped up to the plate and gave us enough membership to be recconized as a legitimate club and have the voice needed to push for expansion . It also gave us membership into the LKS(League of Kentucky Sportsman) which gave us voting rights at the state meetings of this organization."
> 
> If you'd like I can post up the name and location of all those enlisted UCBK members that came from Canada or other faraway places.
> 
> Here's what Tom Conely (Secretary and Founder of UCBK) posted on your very own UCBK forum on March 19, 2006 after the "compromise" season was finalized:
> 
> "The simple fact is that we got snookered by the end run to the Legislature. That was something we didn't have an answer for. *We need more Ky. members*,and more input next time to legislators and Commissioners. If there is enough of each, we will win in the end, if not we won't."
> 
> And here's what you posted in response: "Multi , I agree with that, and I feel we're making steps toward that in the "right direction" with what we're now doing!"
> 
> So please spare us all this BS about how strong the UCBK is with resident KY hunters.



LOL 

Poor Ace has been blasted with the FACT that everyone knows how his precious UCBK backed into being on the backs of Nonresidents and aliens.

This FACT has been repeatedly posted here over and over yet he continues to deny it.


Its all very funny to see it slapped back at him again and again.


----------



## aceoky

I NEVER said I was done with "the matter" only YOU on that fwiw...it would be foolish of me to be finished with the "matter" while I don't agree with how things were done, just as those who fought this would have been to think it wasn't done properly to "quit" THEN (which I agree with their right to do so)...

As always false accusations don't mean much if anything.....always been that way , likely always will be and that's "a good thing" for most.....

As for "some and not others" , I give credit where due, and don't where it isn't..........:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

JDMiller said:


> Ky Mustang...... I'll answer your questions the best I can.
> 
> As far as Willie's statements ....he's a grown man and can very well back up his statements ....but his opinion is the same as mine. It's not over and its not going away anytime soon. There is only one thing left to resolve this issue once & for all.....three weeks prior to modern gun. September & January is not in question. If we could come to agreement on these three weeks this issue would be finalized. Until then..... we will pursue it as long as it takes.
> 
> now your questions......
> 
> 1. UCBK Membership = 30 plus members*......25 are Ky. Residents.*
> 
> 2. Was there a attempt to contact the UCBK for the compromise meeting in March??? NO...... You can varify this with Lowebow (UBK-VP) & Gary Williams (KBA-Pres.)....we were not invited to the meeting. Fact being ....Ask them if the UCBK contacted them about two weeks prior to the agreement to discuss possible compromise discussions. We basically heard nothing back..... so we figured the groups were not willing to negotiate...so the talks ended. Both of these guys have my respect and I believe they would be willing to answer your questions concerning this. I just want to set the record straight.....the UCBK was not involved in any shape form or fashion...with the compromise. I will also add that it probably would not have made any difference. Considering the circumstances ....we were not in a position to negotiate ....it was this agreement or we would have had the same season we had for 2005.
> 
> In my opinion...... considering the division this has caused it would have been nice to been included. I also think it would have been a show of good faith but I'm well aware that our presence would have been just that....a presence. It was not our show....nor the KDF&WR.
> 
> 3. Survey.......This survey like any survey can be picked apart.......which is what many have done. All I can say is they asked 3600 people from a pool of people that bought resident combination license or landowners.....they asked the questions....the respondants gave the answers. The results were what they were. Cornell is highly respected for their survey work. They have performed surveys for other states concerning crossbows and it showed opposition.
> 
> As far as the harvest numbers..... my guess what you reported may seem odd but its probably accurate. You know as well as I there are no accurate accounts of the number of actual crossbow users in Kentucky. Since we dont use a method specific tag system the only data we have is those that are successful and report it in as a crossbow kill to TeleCheck. 100 harvest in the top counties vs. 84 in the bottom counties is not off base in my opinion. Its been reported that the highest number of crossbow users are in the Eastern counties of the state....which are many on the bottom of the list. I really dont know why....that is except for the fact that the coal industry take its toll on the workers. Its been said that there are more people qualified for methods exemptions / existing crossbow users than any other area of the state.
> 
> Ky. Mustang..... in summary....I agree with a lot of your statements and you probably agree with some of mine. We just stand on the opposite side of the issue on this one. The circumstances surrounding this issue probably lays some blame on the supporters , opposition and the KDF&WR in the manner it was handled. There is a lot more to this than whats been posted on internet sites. At this point in time.....we have what we have and I expect more in the future. Time will be the deciding factor.....could be a year or five....your guess is as good as mine but its definitely going to be pushed for years to come. I will also say ....that considering what we had....its a fair compromise to gain more support.


THERE you are, argue all you want.......facts always outweigh unfounded opinions, and btw I NEVER disputed SOME Canadian membership ONLY they were NOT the majority of membership contrary to what some posted.....


----------



## aceoky

JDMiller said:


> Ky Mustang........... I'll answer some of your questions you brought up.
> 
> 1. The UCBK supported the other candidate. As president of the UCBK I never posted nor stated anything against Ronnie. The problem that a few have with Ronnie is the LKS Board of Directors voted to support the decision of the KDF&WR Commission.....which was voted on for full expansion. This was what should have been supported but instead the LKS/Ronnie was a public focal point of the compromise .....which there was no crossbow supporters in attendance.
> 
> *The 2nd district LKS president even drafted a letter prior to the compromise , to be signed by Ronnie.....which was never done and at no time did he make any vocal show of support . These actions or lack of action was a lot of the reason for resentment.* I have nothing personal against Ronnie and the guys that made their point known......well their big boys...its their decision and like everything else of this process....their pretty fustrated.
> 
> 2. UCBK Membership....... For 2006 we have on the list 30 members. *Only 5 of those are non-residents and none from Canada. *25 members are needed for LKS affiliation and all 25 of the UCBK's are Kentucky residents like you and me and pay Kentucky taxes. Our membership will only get larger.
> 
> As far as Bow clubs....... there were 6 new clubs out of the 3rd district alone ......5 were archery oriented and this provided 12 more votes in addition to one of the districts with the most clubs anyway. All in all.... I view this is good .......it shows sportsman involvement which is needed more that what the continued division ......like fighting other hunters ....*such as whats going on in this thread. *
> 
> 3. LKS Resolution votes ....... *the votes are done by show of hands. The crossbow resolution failed but to state it failed by 11 -130 is mis-leading. *The moderator asked for show of support...at that point it was easily decided it failed . They never asked for a show of those opposed....and there is nothing making you vote on any resolution.....otherwords the delegates of any paticiular club could and did remain neutral on certain issues....*I personally saw many that did not vote either way*. I dont know their reasons from abstaining from certain votes but it did happen. *I will also add that it was stated by the LKS BOD there were 146 delegates present . Your figures add up to 141.*
> 
> 
> Myself and my daughter were delegates for the UCBK........ we met a lot of good people on both sides of the fence on this issue. If you were there ....or as it seems your making out that way.....I wished you would have introduced yourself. You might be suprised that were not as evil as some make this issue out to be. However ....I dont recall seeing you there.


+

NOT much need or prove how absurd these claims are and were NOW is it??:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

*But "just in case"*



JDMiller said:


> thesource....... for 2005 it was around 28 members .....and it was about a split on residents & non-residents.
> 
> Which NEGATES the LIE, that the MAJORITY of membership WAS Canadian period.....
> 
> 
> The LKS....does not require a member to be a resident......so your point is kinda moot. There were a lot of new archery clubs....as I stated ....they only had 25 members listed. Should we question their members.....in my opinion it does'nt matter.
> 
> In 2005 there were around 130 delegates for clubs. Each club is allowed 2 delegates....the UCBK's two votes did not cancel anything out for the KBA. Fact being there are numberous archery clubs with delegate voting powers.....I really dont know what your getting at or even talking about. You might want to do a little more research before you comment.


Also: from JD

thesource...... I'm not denying the UCBK did not have non-residents in our membership. Again its a moot point because there are a lot of clubs in the LKS with non-residents. 

The LKS affiliation ....in the bigger picture of things *does not make the laws. *The KDF&WR & our legislators do. The LKS votes on resolutions ...do not make the laws.....they only suggest to the KDF&WR consider them. 

As far as dirty tricks to circumvent the intent of the process.........I guess if the UCBK did it ..... so did several new bow clubs.....they had only enough members to have LKS affiliation. ..... I guess their circumventing the process as well. 

Thats a joke to even think in that manner.......fact being the LKS welcomes any club that has enough dues paying members and with 146 delegates......2 votes or 50 is not going to sway the clubs that are not hunting oriented. 

SO there you are, for ALL to see what IS truth and what is "not"........:mg:


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Ace - Here's what JDMiller posted on the Excalibur Xbow forum:
> 
> "Guys.....been awhile since I posted on here but I wanted to let everyone know how much the United Crossbow Hunters of Kentucky(UCBK) appreciated your support. When Woody asked for asistance...y'all steped up to the plate and gave us enough membership to be recconized as a legitimate club and have the voice needed to push for expansion . It also gave us membership into the LKS(League of Kentucky Sportsman) which gave us voting rights at the state meetings of this organization."
> 
> If you'd like I can post up the name and location of all those enlisted UCBK members that came from Canada or other faraway places.
> 
> Feel free , PLEASE...... and what would make it relevent???? WERE the MAJORITY OF OUR MEMBERS Canadian............NO that IS the point and the LIE that was posted(among others btw)
> 
> Here's what *Tom Conely (Secretary and Founder of UCBK) posted on your very own UCBK forum on March 19, 2006 after the "compromise" season was finalized:*
> 
> SEE guys MORE proof of the LIES< ----Tom was IN FACT the founder , AND IS a KY resident......unlike the drivel of a non-resident starting it that was posted here.......by "someone"......
> 
> 
> 
> "The simple fact is that we got snookered by the end run to the Legislature. That was something we didn't have an answer for. *We need more Ky. members*,and more input next time to legislators and Commissioners. If there is enough of each, we will win in the end, if not we won't."
> 
> And here's what you posted in response: "Multi , I agree with that, and I feel we're making steps toward that in the "right direction" with what we're now doing!"
> 
> So please spare us all this BS about how strong the UCBK is with resident KY hunters.


It's NOT bs, I've proven it , and JD also.......I guess some people should take thier own advice on things they know nothing about??

OH BTWl, thanks for proving myself correct IN that WE did get the Ky hunters to join!! I would have NEVER stated that , thanks so much!:darkbeer: 

YOU may not like it, but the majority of UCBK membership IS Residnent Ky hunters.......period......NEVER were Canadians a majority, I KNOW it, IF you don't.......well then, can't help you there.......:darkbeer: 

BTW; THAT was what we were talking about "long ago".......JD has "settled it " with the FACTS .......something I wasn't going to do.....NOW everyone KNOWS the truth.....and this BS should stop !!!

MAYBE I should post up where In Public(on the same forum) YOU asked to join the UCBK????>>>:wink: 

Naw, unlike you, I won't "go there".......:wink:


----------



## aceoky

BTW, Ballard how would YOU like us digging into your *NEW club's membershipand affairs *.......(glass houses so to speak)how many members did YOUR club have for the convention??? Were they ALL KY residents??? :wink: Who paid their dues?? 

NOW IF I make (or try to) UNFOUNDED and false claims, about that AS a FACT would YOU remain quiet???? Neither did I.........YOU call it Bs all you want , it's NOT and I know for a fact it's not.........


See I have NO clue to YOUR club's affairs just as you love to speculate on matters best left to factual information........imho Make NO mistake, I know and am NOT guessing...(on the UCBK).......never was, and YOU know that.....or at the very least should..........

Last year, was last year, perhaps it troubles some that in that year we've increased KY membership substantially??? That's fine...... I'll .bet we continue to do it much more in the very near future........ 

Everyone won't like we're succeeding,but such is life.......


----------



## ballard

Don't get me wrong, Ace. I have no problem with UCBK, and I'm sure it'll grow as more people start to use crossbows. But you're attempting to make the UCBK appear to be larger and more influential than it really is. At the end of the day, there's only a handful of people that know anything about it, and they all post on Kyhunting regularly. Say what you will, but I've got hard copies of the thread where about 10 Canadians sent in money to help out their "fellow xbow hunters" in KY (along with a family from Wisconsin, Pa, and other parts unknown). There were even jokes about whether the membership fee could be paid in Canadian dollars and about how some of these recruited "UCBK members" weren't even sure they could find Ky on the map. To wit, here's another post regarding the only UCBK meeting. As you can read, 5 people participated even though it was an electronic meeting: 

"May 1, 2006 On-Line UCBK Meeting

To re-cap...what this first meeting has accomplished

1. *We need members* ....I urge every member to try to continue to recruit .

2. There are several resolutions posted on Ky. Hunting in poll form. The UCBK needs input from members on their opinions in the next few weeks.

3. The UCBK.....discussed and supports a LKS presidential candidate.

4 The UCBK supports a 3rd District KDF&WR Commissioner.

5. The UCBK has adopted the Constitution & By- Laws by concensus.

6. Aceoky has been appointed as secretary and has accepted his appointment.

7. UCBK Board of Director Appointments were discussed and tabled for action until our next meeting. A post concerning the candidates will be posted in the Private Club Business Section.

*Attendance.....JDMiller , Multidigits , Aceoky, Duster , DennyMac , Gwhilikerz*

The UCBK wishes thanks to those that participated and look forward to having more members and participation at our next quarterly meeting in August. Watch for a Agenda Posting and Time/Date posting."


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> BTW, Ballard how would YOU like us digging into your *NEW club's membershipand affairs *.......(glass houses so to speak)how many members did YOUR club have for the convention??? Were they ALL KY residents??? :wink: Who paid their dues??
> 
> NOW IF I make (or try to) UNFOUNDED and false claims, about that AS a FACT would YOU remain quiet???? Neither did I.........YOU call it Bs all you want , it's NOT and I know for a fact it's not.........
> 
> 
> See I have NO clue to YOUR club's affairs just as you love to speculate on matters best left to factual information........imho Make NO mistake, I know and am NOT guessing...(on the UCBK).......never was, and YOU know that.....or at the very least should..........
> 
> Last year, was last year, perhaps it troubles some that in that year we've increased KY membership substantially??? That's fine...... I'll .bet we continue to do it much more in the very near future........
> 
> Everyone won't like we're succeeding,but such is life.......


Ace - ORBA (Ohio River Bowhunters Association) had 5 members at the Convention, but only two voting delegates (which is all that any club is allowed). I'm not sure our total membership count, but we have about 35 total members - all are paid up. Call Ronnie Wells for the list of members if you'd like. Yes, all are KY residents. No, I take that back. We have one member that lives in NY (formerly a KY resident) that is also a landowner. 
We have our own website that is used regularly by all the members. It is private, however, and by invitation only. We have decals, t-shirts and other paraphernalia that are provided to the members. 

If you want to bash ORBA or me, I guess you can call us "elitists" for having a private website. We just try to keep the riff raff out, but I don't think being called an elitist is going to hurt anybody's feelings. We actually have two members that hunt with xbows (or have), and I was even trying to get Kalen to join. 

Anything else you'd like to know?


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Don't get me wrong, Ace. I have no problem with UCBK, and I'm sure it'll grow as more people start to use crossbows. But you're attempting to make the UCBK appear to be larger and more influential than it really is. At the end of the day, there's only a handful of people that know anything about it, and they all post on Kyhunting regularly.
> 
> Say what you will, but I've got hard copies *of the thread* where *about *10 Canadians sent in money to help out their "fellow xbow hunters" in KY (along with a family from Wisconsin, Pa, and other parts unknown). There were even jokes about whether the membership fee could be paid in Canadian dollars and about how some of these recruited "UCBK members" weren't even sure they could find Ky on the map. To wit, here's another post regarding the only UCBK meeting. As you can read, 5 people participated even though it was an electronic meeting:
> 
> "May 1, 2006 On-Line UCBK Meeting
> 
> To re-cap...what this first meeting has accomplished
> 
> 1. *We need members* ....I urge every member to try to continue to recruit .
> 
> 2. There are several resolutions posted on Ky. Hunting in poll form. The UCBK needs input from members on their opinions in the next few weeks.
> 
> 3. The UCBK.....discussed and supports a LKS presidential candidate.
> 
> 4 The UCBK supports a 3rd District KDF&WR Commissioner.
> 
> 5. The UCBK has adopted the Constitution & By- Laws by concensus.
> 
> 6. Aceoky has been appointed as secretary and has accepted his appointment.
> 
> 7. UCBK Board of Director Appointments were discussed and tabled for action until our next meeting. A post concerning the candidates will be posted in the Private Club Business Section.
> 
> *Attendance.....JDMiller , Multidigits , Aceoky, Duster , DennyMac , Gwhilikerz*
> 
> The UCBK wishes thanks to those that participated and look forward to having more members and participation at our next quarterly meeting in August. Watch for a Agenda Posting and Time/Date posting."


NEW math? I count 6 (not that's it's at relevent).......point IS: "having it in a thread " doesn't make it a fact; and I'm certain YOU know that......

HAD you read what this dispute WAS about, still NO one can prove WE had a MAJORITY Canadian membership( which WAS claimed and IS NOT true, among some other stupid unfounded accusations SUCH AS the "founder of the UCBK isn't even a Kentuckian........YOU KNOW that to be a lie...)


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> NEW math? I count 6 (not that's it's at relevent).......point IS: "having it in a thread " doesn't make it a fact; and I'm certain YOU know that......
> 
> HAD you read what this dispute WAS about, still NO one can prove WE had a MAJORITY Canadian membership( which WAS claimed and IS NOT true, among some other stupid unfounded accusations SUCH AS the "founder of the UCBK isn't even a Kentuckian........YOU KNOW that to be a lie...)


You're absolutely right. It's 6. I stand 100% corrected.

Well, let's talk about what are or aren't the facts? Are you saying that the JDMiller misrepresented the UCBK members actually in attendance at your on-line meeting or simply that he forgot to list some others that did attend? Gee, if that's true, I wonder if any of those unlisted people happened to be non-residents? 

I don't know who the "founder" of the UCBK was, but, right about the time it got organized, I saw Willie's name on about 5 different "the UCBK Needs You" threads on the Excalibur xbow forums. And Willie, I believe, is a resident of Indiana (Of course, if I can't trust the UCBK to accurately post their club business info on their own website then it's entirely possible that Willie simply made up the whole thing about being a Hoosier). 

Ace - I'm just yanking your chain. I'll lay off. I'm sure the UCBK will do just fine down the road.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> WERE the MAJORITY OF OUR MEMBERS Canadian............NO that IS the point and the LIE that was posted(among others btw)


See, there you go again. The important point is not if the MAJORITY of members were Canadian, It is whether or not the obviously interloping Canadian membership impacted your ability to join the LKS.

The answer is YES. Canadian interlopers ENABLED the UCBK to join LKS. What the membership is now is irrelevant as long as you stay above 25. The FACT (as you like to say) is that Canadians are responsible for your Kentucky Crossbow club's viability.....

Argue with these FACTS, ace. We already know the truth, and you will only make yourself look more ridiculous (if possible) by attempting to spin truth into fiction.:darkbeer:


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> See, there you go again. The important point is not if the MAJORITY of members were Canadian, It is whether or not the obviously interloping Canadian membership impacted your ability to join the LKS.
> 
> The answer is YES. Canadian interlopers ENABLED the UCBK to join LKS. What the membership is now is irrelevant as long as you stay above 25. The FACT (as you like to say) is that Canadians are responsible for your Kentucky Crossbow club's viability.....
> 
> Argue with these FACTS, ace. We already know the truth, and you will only make yourself look more ridiculous (if possible) by attempting to spin truth into fiction.:darkbeer:


Source..i notice a trend....Ace runs and hides under a rock until teh heat cools down( everyone leaves) and then runs back to do some chest thumping..then he gets proven a fool or a liar then he's off again. Its like cyber cat and mouse. I like watching a liar back up his lies with more of the same. its a humerous cycle. And as always source, Spot on brother.


----------



## thesource

Marvin - you are a perceptive little devil.

Now that you mention it, that does seem to be the pattern.

Kinfolk to Willie, do you think? He exhibits the same "cut and run" tendencies .... lol.:wink:


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> Marvin - you are a perceptive little devil.
> 
> Now that you mention it, that does seem to be the pattern.
> 
> Kinfolk to Willie, do you think? He exhibits the same "cut and run" tendencies .... lol.:wink:


 Thanks source! 
Been doing some research, and i know the cut and runner will read this one so Here it is


How many non-resident members did you have as of 4-1-05? 

I have counted by the way. Should not be that hard to answer and I can tell you surely ain't 6. 

Were wiating for that elusive 3 am reply....


----------



## thesource

OOOOOh! OOOOh!

I have a guess! Let me guess, let me answer!!!!!:wink:


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> OOOOOh! OOOOh!
> 
> I have a guess! Let me guess, let me answer!!!!!:wink:


We will wait till after 3 am then you can answer in the morning. PM coming your way source with some links.


----------



## Silver Pine

Why would someone from New York or Colorado care what happens in Kentucky? 

Do you hunt in Kentucky?

Do you own property in Kentucky?

The most important question would be - 

Would you allow residents from Kentucky to share "your" woods this season or do you think they would cause OVERCROWDING and should be banned?


----------



## Marvin

Silver Pine said:


> Why would someone from New York or Colorado care what happens in Kentucky?
> 
> Do you hunt in Kentucky?
> 
> Do you own property in Kentucky?
> 
> The most important question would be -
> 
> Would you allow residents from Kentucky to share "your" woods this season or do you think they would cause OVERCROWDING and should be banned?


I am going to suggest you read the ENTIRE thread. You will find out that CANADA has a vested interest in Kentucky laws and rules. You will find your answer if you take the time to look.


----------



## Silver Pine

Marvin - reread my post and see if you can answer any of the questions that are listed there.


----------



## thesource

Silver Pine said:


> Why would someone from New York or Colorado care what happens in Kentucky?
> 
> Do you hunt in Kentucky?
> 
> Do you own property in Kentucky?
> 
> The most important question would be -
> 
> Would you allow residents from Kentucky to share "your" woods this season or do you think they would cause OVERCROWDING and should be banned?


LOL.

Why would someone from Illinois chastise someone from NY or CO for discussing what is happening in KY?:wink: 

I have no problem with anyone coming to NY to bowhunt.....but you have to follow our rules!:darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> See, there you go again. The important point is not if the MAJORITY of members were Canadian, It is whether or not the obviously interloping Canadian membership impacted your ability to join the LKS.
> 
> The answer is YES. Canadian interlopers ENABLED the UCBK to join LKS. What the membership is now is irrelevant as long as you stay above 25. The FACT (as you like to say) is that Canadians are responsible for your Kentucky Crossbow club's viability.....
> 
> Argue with these FACTS, ace. We already know the truth, and you will only make yourself look more ridiculous (if possible) by attempting to spin truth into fiction.:darkbeer:



NO the statement WAS made that the MAJORITY of our membership WAS Canadian I tried to explain that wasn't true, it was disputed and I was called a liar, IF that is not the issue, WHY mention it then??

Yes WE had SOME Canadian members(who DO crossbow hunt and in KY even.....hmmm imagine that!!!) That's a "far cry" from a "vested interest in Ky law btw" the "spin" from some is simply amazing, especially considering the "source" of the information.....

Also Willie IS a KY hunter, he's more than proven that fact.......however HE didn't start or " found "the UCBK, (though he certainly worked hard to gain membership among many otther valuable things, WE are all happy to have him as a member fwiw)..it WAS a KY Resident, too bad I guess for some.........oh well..

The REST is NOT relevent.....never was, never will be as JD has so easily explained for the "slow" ..... 

I have NO doubts most know I am quite certain of the FACTS , having been a "part" of this since the start.........NONE of you spewing this misinformation (still) can say that, you're guessing and going on "bad information " gained from internet forums, that's NOT "FACTS" ......and almost anyone would KNOW that FACT......

BTW only those who actually paid their dues are members, saying I will join is not doing that no matter on what forum it is posted on or by whom (or where they reside) but WE don't discriminate, those who believe in what WE stand for are welcome, as it's always been..........sorry IF that offends some


----------



## Silver Pine

thesource - I didn't chastise anyone. I only asked four (4) questions. Do you think I should have phrased them differently? Marvin didn't seem to understand any of them and you only answered one (1). Thanks for an answer, tho.

Anybody else?


----------



## JDMiller

Well ..... I thought I was through with this but my name sure gets mentioned in a lot of the quotes.

Guys..... I'll be happy to enlighten ya'll on our present & past membership & a little history.

The UCBK was started by Tom C. and my records show the membership began in late March & early April of 2005. This was right after the first vote by the commission and the beginning of the majority of opposition. Most all established sporting clubs are affiliate members of the LKS. This requires a minimum of 25 members to qualify. The deadline on submitting your membership info is in May...I believe. At this point we had a few members but needed more to beat the deadline. Willie posted the membership info on a few crossbow forums and this is where we got the non resident membership. 

I have a copy of what was submitted to the LKS in 2005 and I think that is what Ballard has seen and commented on. It shows 29 members and after checking the addresses....its about 10 residents. Now this is where I'm going to throw the cog and let you in on something Ballard may or may not realize if he is basing his comments on the LKS membership list. Where is my name...or family or friend members , where is Aces name or family members, where is Toms..family or friend members, where is Kalens and his family or friend members, where are a few others names??? Their not on the the list because they joined after the LKS deadline in May. We actually had more residents than non-residents by the end of July or August. It was probably around 55% resident if I've done my math with the records I have.

Most of this membership including mine.... did not count on the LKS roster because we did not pay LKS dues or receive the LKS benefits.... but we were very much dues paying UCBK members. Some of our members were already members of other clubs that were in the LKS.... The UCBK can not count them because they were counted in their origional LKS club....that is LKS rules. I hope I did'nt confuse too many on this. 

For 2006......as stated in another thread....we focused on resident membership to combat some of the negetive remarks. We ended up submitting to the LKS....30 members.....only 5 were non-residents. Otherwords this year 95% of our members ...live , work & pay taxes in Kentucky. Ballard.... feel free to check this out if you feel the need. 

As far as I know.....the UCBK never denied not having non-resident members but in-turn ....its not against LKS rules. As far as the members involved in Commission Meetings & LKS resolution votes.....they were Kentucky members. I also will add that at the 2005 LKS convention....are participation there did not involve any resolutions that involved crossbow expansion. There was none on the agenda at that time. So...regardless of what you might think...non-residents membership did not play any factor with the LKS except for recognizing us a a legitimit club before the deadline. Nor did any non-residents have any input at the commission meetings.

I will also add the UCBK thread concerning our only meeting is not correct .....this was our first On-Line meeting since we established our website. However....a portion of the members have met prior to the commission meetings to disuss business at hand. .....I asure these were impromptu meetings....but they were meetings never the less. 

Our membership is scattered all over the state and it was in our best interest to attempt on-line meeting instead of everyone driving for hours to get to a centralized location. Cyber-Hunters ....a organized sportsman club in Kentucky basically does the same thing and have LKS affiliation and voting delegates at the convention. As we grow hopefully we can start adding local chapters and have better one on one activities. The UCBK....as of now is the only organized crossbow club in the state. 

I will also add one more thing concerning the UCBK & the LKS.... Ronnie Wells ( LKS President)called me the other evening and we discussed the events of late. He wants the UCBK to stay in the LKS and offered assistance in helping recruit members. As of now were discussing this matter and making a decision. We are both in agreement that we have a golden opportunity to gain new membership and we both agreed to improve relations between the two organizations. It was a interesting conversation but a productive one 

As I've said many times......nothing about this issue appears as it seems and no one is completly right nor wrong. Ballard was right and so was Ace....I just wanted to clear up the in between.


----------



## spec

So in 2005 you had 19 non-residents (out of 29) and in 2006 you had only 5( out of 30 members). That means you lost nearly 50% of your membership after only 1 year.


----------



## thesource

It also shows EXACTLY what Marvin has said and ACE has denied....

Nonresidents ENABLED UCBK to join LKS. Period. They had to recruit crossbowers from different COUNTRIES, for crying out loud, to generate enough interest in KY to get into LKS.

But we all know why getting into LKS was an important goal - so they could get 2 reps to cancel out UKB's 2 reps.

You are certainly correct, JDMiller .... it was not illegal.

That doesn't mean that it wasn't dirty and deceitful. The fact that Ace continues to deny it even though you admit it probably is a good indication that y'all know you went about it underhandedly.

Its all water under the bridge now, and as long as y'all can sleep at night, it'll be OK....your club has become a much more legitimate representation of KY crossbow enthusiasts since then.

Thanks for setting the record straight. You should try to throttle your UCBK mouthpiece, however - he generates a very large amount of animosity towards UCBK and its agenda.


----------



## Marvin

Silver Pine said:


> thesource - I didn't chastise anyone. I only asked four (4) questions. Do you think I should have phrased them differently? Marvin didn't seem to understand any of them and you only answered one (1). Thanks for an answer, tho.
> 
> Anybody else?


Actually All I asked is that YOU read the entire thread. if you want the cliff notes version then you should have asked. It pretty obvious. Your back handed attempt to chastise people is pretty lame. When non residents have a large say in what goes on in my state, I'm done.

edit to add. This is a very dangerous event that you have now set a precedent for. I hope that pandoras box is not opened.( JD and ACD)


----------



## Jim C

just a question. given I have in-laws with land in KY and hunting "rights" on their property I think I have a right to be involved in KY. (I can walk to KY from my office in less than ten minutes). However, what about groups like PBS and the P&Y sponsored anti crossbow cult trying to keep xbows out of KY? People have problems with pro xbow guys from Ohio or Canada or Maryland joining a small pro xbow group in KY-what about people like Free Range whose membership dues help PBS spread its propaganda in KY?


----------



## JDMiller

spec said:


> So in 2005 you had 19 non-residents (out of 29) and in 2006 you had only 5( out of 30 members). That means you lost nearly 50% of your membership after only 1 year.


 We did loose the biggest majority. We tried are best to get in-state membership this time but non-residents can join anytime they wish. The LKS benefit package was cut and members do not receive the Kentucky Afield magazine anymore. I heard a lot of the nonresidents comment on how much they enjoyed the magazine and honestly with a $12.00 membership fee it was a really good deal. I dont know how much of a factor this was but they did'nt re-up. I will add my sentiments in the quote I made on the Excal forum.....I appreciate the help they gave us to get started. 

Membership is also for one year.....otherwords if you join in June its up in June. Our 30 on the books for the LKS deadline is subject to change throughout the year.


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> just a question. given I have in-laws with land in KY and hunting "rights" on their property I think I have a right to be involved in KY. (I can walk to KY from my office in less than ten minutes). However, what about groups like PBS and the P&Y sponsored anti crossbow cult trying to keep xbows out of KY? People have problems with pro xbow guys from Ohio or Canada or Maryland joining a small pro xbow group in KY-what about people like Free Range whose membership dues help PBS spread its propaganda in KY?


No you don't your not a resident bottom line. Are you allowed to vote for govenor of Kentucky?


----------



## Free Range

> Why would someone from New York or Colorado care what happens in Kentucky?
> 
> Do you hunt in Kentucky?
> 
> Do you own property in Kentucky?
> 
> The most important question would be -
> 
> Would you allow residents from Kentucky to share "your" woods this season or do you think they would cause OVERCROWDING and should be banned?


Good question Silver Pine, let me see if I can give you a coherent answer. 
1)	I care what is going on in KY, because going by recent trends this is spreading, it’s kind of like an infection, if you don’t stop it quickly it will infect your whole body. 
2)	And would I care if NR came to CO to hunt, heck no, come on out, we do have limits on how many can hunt the draw units, something like 75/25 residents to NR, but the OTC units are unlimited and there for all to enjoy. 
3)	Oh and NO I haven’t hunted in KY, yet, but you never know maybe some day. 




> However, what about groups like PBS and the P&Y sponsored anti crossbow cult trying to keep xbows out of KY? People have problems with pro xbow guys from Ohio or Canada or Maryland joining a small pro xbow group in KY-what about people like Free Range whose membership dues help PBS spread its propaganda in KY?


Uh, P&Y and PBS are NATIONAL clubs like the NRA, RMEF, DU, QU, N***, NFAA, ASA, IBO, you get the picture.


----------



## Free Range

> I have a copy of what was submitted to the LKS in 2005 and I think that is what Ballard has seen and commented on. It shows 29 members and after checking the addresses....its about 10 residents.


OUCH, Ace that’s got to hurt. First I didn’t think Marvin said the majority, but I could be wrong, I thought it was always contended, if not for NR the UCBK wouldn’t have had enough members to get in the LKS, now it seams both are true, according to my “OLD MATH” 10-29=19 non-residents in a total of 29 that’s a majority EVERY TIME.


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> No you don't your not a resident bottom line. Are you allowed to vote for govenor of Kentucky?



well my dad was a Kentucky Colonel-I thought they got to vote 

lets change it-can my brother in law have a say since he's a landowner in KY? he wants to hunt with his crossbow but he can't vote for governor since he lives in ohio. He pays land taxes in KY though.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Good question Silver Pine, let me see if I can give you a coherent answer.
> 1)	I care what is going on in KY, because going by recent trends this is spreading, it’s kind of like an infection, if you don’t stop it quickly it will infect your whole body.
> 2)	And would I care if NR came to CO to hunt, heck no, come on out, we do have limits on how many can hunt the draw units, something like 75/25 residents to NR, but the OTC units are unlimited and there for all to enjoy.
> 3)	Oh and NO I haven’t hunted in KY, yet, but you never know maybe some day.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, P&Y and PBS are NATIONAL clubs like the NRA, RMEF, DU, QU, NA***, NFAA, ASA, IBO, you get the picture.


Poop and Dung's and PBS illness is an infection-we need to eradicate those disease vectors KY is a good place to start


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> well my dad was a Kentucky Colonel-I thought they got to vote
> 
> lets change it-can my brother in law have a say since he's a landowner in KY? he wants to hunt with his crossbow but he can't vote for governor since he lives in ohio. He pays land taxes in KY though.


Nope, should not matter. He does not get two votes for president either. Tell him to move there if he wants it. Heck, I bought a can of pop in kentucky...I want a say now since its in a kentucky landfill and I still own it 

Does your brotehr in law buy a resident or non resident tag to hunt on his land?


----------



## Marvin

Free Range said:


> OUCH, Ace that’s got to hurt. First I didn’t think Marvin said the majority, but I could be wrong, I thought it was always contended, if not for NR the UCBK wouldn’t have had enough members to get in the LKS, now it seams both are true, according to my “OLD MATH” 10-29=19 non-residents in a total of 29 that’s a majority EVERY TIME.


Don't start this nonsense Freerange...the spin will be unreal. Marvin-10 ace-0( again)
Heck the sun just got up and its a wonderful day


----------



## JDMiller

thesource said:


> It also shows EXACTLY what Marvin has said and ACE has denied....
> 
> Nonresidents ENABLED UCBK to join LKS. Period. They had to recruit crossbowers from different COUNTRIES, for crying out loud, to generate enough interest in KY to get into LKS.
> 
> But we all know why getting into LKS was an important goal - so they could get 2 reps to cancel out UKB's 2 reps.
> 
> You are certainly correct, JDMiller .... it was not illegal.
> 
> That doesn't mean that it wasn't dirty and deceitful. The fact that Ace continues to deny it even though you admit it probably is a good indication that y'all know you went about it underhandedly.
> 
> 
> Source......... I'm just shedding some light on a topic that was used against us throughout this matter. Our LKS affiliation & our two delegate votes does'nt cancel out anyones vote..... I think you have some mis-information on this....if we vote two for & they vote two against....thats just what it is. Their vote is counted just as ours....devide that into 146 delegates...no ones vote is lost and more than likely you will never see a tie. Even then the LKS has By-Laws & rules set-up to cast the deciding vote. Were the only crossbow club vs. numberous bow clubs and both still in the minority as compared to the general hunting & fishing orginizations spread across the state. Like it was this year....... we voted on a pretty broad range of resolutions .....only one had anything to do with crossbows.
> 
> Our wanting to join was not dirty nor deceitful. The LKS is the largest & oldest sporting organization in Kentucky. Most if not all hunting & fishing clubs have affiliation with the LKS. You could start a boomerang hunting club and become a affliate with the LKS.....if you pay LKS dues. The resolutions we vote on are mere suggestions to KDF&WR.... they can act on them as they see fit.... or not act on them at all. Any clubs specific agenda or purpose on a resolution.....is no guarantee it will be passed. Our agenda on joining the LKS was to be reccognized as a legitamit club and have a voice on issues that concern sportsman. In two years...only one resolution has concerned crossbows. I will also add again...... the LKS is asking us to stay affiliated and work together on future issues. I think this is a good thing for everyone.


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> Nope, should not matter. He does not get two votes for president either. Tell him to move there if he wants it. Heck, I bought a can of pop in kentucky...I want a say now since its in a kentucky landfill and I still own it
> 
> Does your brotehr in law buy a resident or non resident tag to hunt on his land?



good question-I don't know the answer to that. I think if you own hunting property in a state and pay taxes on it you ought to have a say in the hunting regulations though I agree with you on voting for president-that's only allowed for older Jewish voters who live in NYC and have winter homes in Miami:wink:


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> good question-I don't know the answer to that. I think if you own hunting property in a state and pay taxes on it you ought to have a say in the hunting regulations though I agree with you on voting for president-that's only allowed for older Jewish voters who live in NYC and have winter homes in Miami:wink:


No on the regs. Thats asinine because your have a state run organization, its leader is appointed by the govenor which you are not allowed to vote for. Pretty simple. Agreed on Miami :tongue: touche


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> good question-I don't know the answer to that. I think if you own hunting property in a state and pay taxes on it you ought to have a say in the hunting regulations though I agree with you on voting for president-that's only allowed for older Jewish voters who live in NYC and have winter homes in Miami:wink:


He has to buy nonresident liec. KDFW is not funded by property taxes.


----------



## Marvin

KY MUSTANG said:


> He has to buy nonresident liec. KDFW is not funded by property taxes.


Signed, Sealed and delivered Jim.  :wink:


----------



## ballard

JDMiller said:


> thesource said:
> 
> 
> 
> It also shows EXACTLY what Marvin has said and ACE has denied....
> 
> Nonresidents ENABLED UCBK to join LKS. Period. They had to recruit crossbowers from different COUNTRIES, for crying out loud, to generate enough interest in KY to get into LKS.
> 
> But we all know why getting into LKS was an important goal - so they could get 2 reps to cancel out UKB's 2 reps.
> 
> You are certainly correct, JDMiller .... it was not illegal.
> 
> That doesn't mean that it wasn't dirty and deceitful. The fact that Ace continues to deny it even though you admit it probably is a good indication that y'all know you went about it underhandedly.
> 
> 
> Source......... I'm just shedding some light on a topic that was used against us throughout this matter. Our LKS affiliation & our two delegate votes does'nt cancel out anyones vote..... I think you have some mis-information on this....if we vote two for & they vote two against....thats just what it is. Their vote is counted just as ours....devide that into 146 delegates...no ones vote is lost and more than likely you will never see a tie. Even then the LKS has By-Laws & rules set-up to cast the deciding vote. Were the only crossbow club vs. numberous bow clubs and both still in the minority as compared to the general hunting & fishing orginizations spread across the state. Like it was this year....... we voted on a pretty broad range of resolutions .....only one had anything to do with crossbows.
> 
> Our wanting to join was not dirty nor deceitful. The LKS is the largest & oldest sporting organization in Kentucky. Most if not all hunting & fishing clubs have affiliation with the LKS. You could start a boomerang hunting club and become a affliate with the LKS.....if you pay LKS dues. The resolutions we vote on are mere suggestions to KDF&WR.... they can act on them as they see fit.... or not act on them at all. Any clubs specific agenda or purpose on a resolution.....is no guarantee it will be passed. Our agenda on joining the LKS was to be reccognized as a legitamit club and have a voice on issues that concern sportsman. In two years...only one resolution has concerned crossbows. I will also add again...... the LKS is asking us to stay affiliated and work together on future issues. I think this is a good thing for everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> JD - That's good to hear that Ronnie is reaching out to UCBK. The LKS should be seeking to encourage participation by EVERY sportsmen organization.
Click to expand...


----------



## aceoky

Just to "clear things up a bit"........and it's all here for anyone to read for themselves.....

Marving DID in fact say the majority of the UCBK's membership was and is Canadian AND the "founder" wasn't even a KY Resident!(he "thought" Willie started it ).........I tried to inform him of nothing he'd stated was close to fact, he didn't listen and told him a VAST MAJORITY of our membership was Kentucky residents (JD just confirmed that with 95% being Ky members).... 

I don't think I'll trust Marvin to "keep score"...... for anyone else use your own judgement here........:cocktail: 

There was NO "pandora's box" opened, Marvin, NO laws, rules or anything else have been broken, several other clubs have done the exact same thing to make the deadlne , sorry for you we were NOT the first.....

Had you bothered to actually check for facts rather than rely on forum BS and NOT called me a liar on the UCBK (which obviously I'd know a bit more about than you....) then you'd have known all of this then.........you refused to accept the truth.......

BTW, I NEVER denied NR membership, ONLY that the majority of our membership was Canadian, it wasn't ever, period......don't like that too bad....

All of this misinformation serves NO good purpose and undermines the whole intent of this entire thread, which IS about the process and tactics that were used over a "social issue" which is in fact a "non-issue", how can anyone justify going to such lengths over what another HUNTER chooses to use (an archery weapon during an open archery season ).......NO way to justify doing that much less the tactics that were used, such as the Radio Talk Show which was at best an entire show devoted to pure misinformation to garner support for a stupid bill(imho), sb211 They like to brag about the support they gained for it, but seem to overlook it was based upon lies.......IF anyone cares about HOW things are done, they should most certainly keep that FACT in mind........

Add to that fact; once the TRUTH came out,there was never (to my knowledge and belief) another show done to admit they were wrong......WHY would people that most would believe they could and should trust come out on a Radio show and give false information and NEVER retract it?????

Though that is only one example, it's an important one, Ballard knows this took place he was on the show..........he knows the truth came out......the REGs had in fact been filed for some time BEFORE that show saying they hadn't and wouldn't be filed so as to make them become law, AFTER the legislature left for the session (not one word was true or factual btw)......

SEE; this thread is NOT about crossbows, (except as the tactics used WERE on the expansion), it's a "lesson" for us all, no matter the issue OR which side of said issue one might choose........

Sometimes it's wise and prudent to "pick" your battles and save the "big guns"and"nukes" for serious matters (and NO one sees this as THAT big a deal or so serious.....as to risk the "fallout" that we are NOW very likely to see on future issues)

Jim C. You can't vote here, but make NO mistake about it, your input as a KY hunter, (yes even a NR) IS taken into account by the KDFWR, feel free to contact them (even by email) and you'll see that to be true (or ask Willie who I believe knows this as well).....


IN summary:

WE (UCBK) did NOTHING wrong, WE NEVER had a majority Canadian membership as was claimed......ever....we concentrated on getting more Ky membership( I'd say a wise move, especially based upon the BS I've seen here)......WE have increased our Ky membership, the group IS growing, and the LKS is "onboard" with us NOW........I agree with JD , that is positive for KY , the LKS and the UCBK...... 

It's "funny" that our NR membership hunt in KY ........they have a voice with us and the LKS........(as IS their right as people who hunt in KY, by joining).....I guess some don't like the way it is, but rest assured, it IS how the LKS and UCBK feel it should be so long as that's the case, things aren't going to change on that front.......accept them or whine, won't really matter....Even Ballard's NEW club has a NR member who hunts in Ky......wonder why NO one has tried to chastise him for that????

We're over a year old his is new and already has 20% of the NR membership we now have!!! (that's my yanking your chain Ballard all in good fun btw)...

Point being NO one asks other's advice on (outside of thier group(s) for membership "ideas" we are ALL free to decide that for ourselves, IF you don't agree with those choices, that's fine by me.......just don't try to make FALSE claims OR attempt to dictate on who should and shouldn't be granted membership, WE don't want or need your help in that area......thanks:darkbeer:

And NO FR, it's not a "cancer" spreading no more than it was when compounds did EXACTLY the same thing, NOW most KNOW it was a "good thing" though then, the exact same arguements were used against compound inclusion........."funny" how that works...

...they "worried" over the same exact things that NEVER came to be; just as this will be......so while you and yours accept and embrace compounds, just remember some time ago they were where the crossbow IS right now, same non-fact based, "feelings" arguments, same "social issues", they made it in......and most agree it's saved archery hunting.......NOW it's the crossbow's turn.....and NO reason to even suspect it will be any different.......

As Willie says so well , in the end it will be "much ado about nothing"......Just as it's been in all the other states which have passed the inclusion......gladly most of them didn't go to such extremems oftne based upon lies to avoid it, and found out there was NO "big deal".......just as we will see in KY during this expanded season, despite some's best efforts to NOT give "an inch".....

WE got an expanded season despite ALL of the back door deals, being left out of the last meetings, and every other thing that was done in a feeble attempt to exclude other hunters........what does that tell everyone???? 

I'm very happy with what we got after all the things done to try to stop ANY expansion, but that is not what is really important, it's the HOW and WHY of it being fought.........tactics used etc.etc. It's so "funny" to me, that most of those opposed did so on the HOW it was done at first then went on do do far worse things in the end to "get their way"(or try to do so at least)...

I'll even state it again HAD they worked together with US, on a compromise early on, we'd have gotten less than we ended up with (because we offered a shorter season to "end" this then.........) They fought the entire concept of compromise, holding on to the belief WE'd get "nothing" in the end and lost the bet......as I've stated mistakes were made on both sides (and by myself as well).......however there are many valuable lessons to be learned from all of this for everyone and for the future of hunting imho


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Just to "clear things up a bit"........and it's all here for anyone to read for themselves.....
> 
> Marving DID in fact say the majority of the UCBK's membership was and is Canadian AND the "founder" wasn't even a KY Resident!(he "thought" Willie started it ).........I tried to inform him of nothing he'd stated was close to fact, he didn't listen and told him a VAST MAJORITY of our membership was Kentucky residents (JD just confirmed that with 95% being Ky members)....
> 
> I don't think I'll trust Marvin to "keep score"...... for anyone else use your own judgement here........:cocktail:
> 
> There was NO "pandora's box" opened, Marvin, NO laws, rules or anything else have been broken, several other clubs have done the exact same thing to make the deadlne , sorry for you we were NOT the first.....
> 
> Had you bothered to actually check for facts rather than rely on forum BS and NOT called me a liar on the UCBK (which obviously I'd know a bit more about than you....) then you'd have known all of this then.........you refused to accept the truth.......
> 
> BTW, I NEVER denied NR membership, ONLY that the majority of our membership was Canadian, it wasn't ever, period......don't like that too bad....
> 
> All of this misinformation serves NO good purpose and undermines the whole intent of this entire thread, which IS about the process and tactics that were used over a "social issue" which is in fact a "non-issue", how can anyone justify going to such lengths over what another HUNTER chooses to use (an archery weapon during an open archery season ).......NO way to justify doing that much less the tactics that were used, such as the Radio Talk Show which was at best an entire show devoted to pure misinformation to garner support for a stupid bill(imho), sb211 They like to brag about the support they gained for it, but seem to overlook it was based upon lies.......IF anyone cares about HOW things are done, they should most certainly keep that FACT in mind........
> 
> Add to that fact; once the TRUTH came out,there was never (to my knowledge and belief) another show done to admit they were wrong......WHY would people that most would believe they could and should trust come out on a Radio show and give false information and NEVER retract it?????
> 
> Though that is only one example, it's an important one, Ballard knows this took place he was on the show..........he knows the truth came out......the REGs had in fact been filed for some time BEFORE that show saying they hadn't and wouldn't be filed so as to make them become law, AFTER the legislature left for the session (not one word was true or factual btw)......
> 
> SEE; this thread is NOT about crossbows, (except as the tactics used WERE on the expansion), it's a "lesson" for us all, no matter the issue OR which side of said issue one might choose........
> 
> Sometimes it's wise and prudent to "pick" your battles and save the "big guns"and"nukes" for serious matters (and NO one sees this as THAT big a deal or so serious.....as to risk the "fallout" that we are NOW very likely to see on future issues)
> 
> Jim C. You can't vote here, but make NO mistake about it, your input as a KY hunter, (yes even a NR) IS taken into account by the KDFWR, feel free to contact them (even by email) and you'll see that to be true (or ask Willie who I believe knows this as well).....
> 
> 
> IN summary:
> 
> WE (UCBK) did NOTHING wrong, WE NEVER had a majority Canadian membership as was claimed......ever....we concentrated on getting more Ky membership( I'd say a wise move, especially based upon the BS I've seen here)......WE have increased our Ky membership, the group IS growing, and the LKS is "onboard" with us NOW........I agree with JD , that is positive for KY , the LKS and the UCBK......
> Your websites a little "slow"
> It's "funny" that our NR membership hunt in KY ........they have a voice with us and the LKS........(as IS their right as people who hunt in KY, by joining).....I guess some don't like the way it is, but rest assured, it IS how the LKS and UCBK feel it should be so long as that's the case, things aren't going to change on that front.......accept them or whine, won't really matter....Even Ballard's NEW club has a NR member who hunts in Ky......wonder why NO one has tried to chastise him for that????
> Because his non resident is not spouting off on a message board saying, i'll never hunt Ky but I sure will help( you form your cheaters club that is)
> 
> We're over a year old his is new and already has 20% of the NR membership we now have!!! (that's my yanking your chain Ballard all in good fun btw)...
> 
> Point being NO one asks other's advice on (outside of thier group(s) for membership "ideas" we are ALL free to decide that for ourselves, IF you don't agree with those choices, that's fine by me.......just don't try to make FALSE claims OR attempt to dictate on who should and shouldn't be granted membership, WE don't want or need your help in that area......thanks:darkbeer:
> 
> And NO FR, it's not a "cancer" spreading no more than it was when compounds did EXACTLY the same thing, NOW most KNOW it was a "good thing" though then, the exact same arguements were used against compound inclusion........."funny" how that works...
> 
> ...they "worried" over the same exact things that NEVER came to be; just as this will be......so while you and yours accept and embrace compounds, just remember some time ago they were where the crossbow IS right now, same non-fact based, "feelings" arguments, same "social issues", they made it in......and most agree it's saved archery hunting.......NOW it's the crossbow's turn.....and NO reason to even suspect it will be any different.......
> 
> As Willie says so well , in the end it will be "much ado about nothing"......Just as it's been in all the other states which have passed the inclusion......gladly most of them didn't go to such extremems oftne based upon lies to avoid it, and found out there was NO "big deal".......just as we will see in KY during this expanded season, despite some's best efforts to NOT give "an inch".....
> 
> WE got an expanded season despite ALL of the back door deals, being left out of the last meetings, and every other thing that was done in a feeble attempt to exclude other hunters........what does that tell everyone????
> MAn you sure seem bitter but I guess your Really just want to work together. How is a non resident majority not a back door deal? Did the UBK break any rules? Thought so. Not fun when they shoot back is it slick
> I'm very happy with what we got ( not really you squeal fowl until you get more than they want and gun hunter too.) after all the things done to try to stop ANY expansion, but that is not what is really important, it's the HOW and WHY of it being fought.........tactics used etc.etc. It's so "funny" to me, that most of those opposed did so on the HOW it was done at first then went on do do far worse things in the end to "get their way"(or try to do so at least)...
> 
> I'll even state it again HAD they worded together with US, on a compromise early on, we'd have gotten less than we ended up with (because we offered a shorter season to "end" this then.........) ( pretty obvious yoru a liar here since ballard said your group was there) (Make it harder next time to make you the fool) They fought the entire concept of compromise, holding on to the belief WE'd get "nothing" in the end and lost the bet......as I've stated mistakes were made on both sides (and by myself as well).......however there are many valuable lessons to be learned from all of this for everyone and for the future of hunting imho



You will in fact never learn. Still bad mouthing, lying and whining.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Ok how do P-R funds work, they only match funds from the elderly? And yes it is a tax, I don’t care how the liberals dress it up, when you have to pay the government money to do something it’s a tax.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See above for the definition of tax.
> 
> Your opinion on many things lacks credibiltiy to many of us, as you've more than been told ample times.....Do YOU NOT have to pay to hunt in CO??? Why or why not?? WE did check with many senior hunters and orgs BEFORE going forward with this, funny thing MOST agreed it was an awesome idea and $5 wouldn't hurt anyone, senior or not, but the addtional funds would HELP all of KY........ I happen to agree as many of us did and it became a fact.......however WE didn't work on that for CO so you're "safe" from this whatever YOU wish to call it
> 
> SEE many people WANT more Public Land for the chance to hunt but some don't think anyone should actually work and figure ways to get the $$$$ to do that with........same with more CO and better pay so we can keep the good ones...............newsflash.........all that cost $$$ and it must come in before it can go out.........simple really........AND this is ONLY ONE of the ways WE have worked to try to get things needed actually moved forward ; rather than whining on forums about stuff some of US actually become active in DOING, not just talking........
> 
> 
> 
> Above you said it don’t work that way, now does P-R match license sales or not?
> 
> That IS exactly what they do, match sales(including tags IIRC) SO "adding $.50 to each existing license would NOT accomplish the same thing......nor even close,
> 
> Adding $.50 to each one would only add that same .$50 , doing it this way WE add IIRC $10 for every $5 spent........As I've already explained.......BIG difference and almost everyone agrees it is a good thing......Plus adding more to existing hunters could cause some to not buy them, THUS we'd lose those matching funds as well........it's called the "big picture" and it's past time for you to at least try to understand it.........BTW, I don't think there was one "liberal" who actually worked on this........fwiw(there were no doubt some "liberals" in the Legislature......as is expected
> 
> 
> Please stay consistent you are confusing this simple country boy with your back and forth statements.


I AM always consistant, it's the "spin" of hoping some just might think that I'm not that I find so amuzing.........I've been consistant for more than two decades in KY working for what I beleive to be good for us ALL.....and hope to continue for many more decades as well.............


----------



## aceoky

I'll even state it again HAD they worked together with US, on a compromise early on, we'd have gotten less than we ended up with (because we offered a shorter season to "end" this then.........) 

Marvin said "

( pretty obvious yoru a liar here since ballard said your group was there) (Make it harder next time to make you the fool)

That not only doesn't make ANY sense (at least to me) but I'd love to see where Ballard said that.......

I'm not a liar, by now you should have figured that out, but because you have nothing else you accuse me falsely again and again.......keep it up, IF you think it's helping you in any way

WE worked (or more honestly TRIED to) to work and a compromise and save the Cornell survey $$$ and in fact had they agreed to one the survey would have never been needed....again they refused believing the survey results would help them (maybe had YOU heard the tapes you'd know this??) 

Bottom line, WE offered several compromised seasons......NONE were accepted (and yes some were shorter than what we ended up with)..........

ALL of which is well known and I beleive a matter of public record , and if not there are certainly enough audio tapes of this to prove it without any question or doubts......

Marvin again :"Still bad mouthing, lying and whining."

NOPE I'm doing NONE of that.......everything I've stated IS fact and easily verified.......period Just because you don't like it concerns me not in the least, and for the record, Yes, I'm a "little bitter" that hunters would go to such extremes against their own kind.......especially over something such as this........I'm not however bitter about what we got (expansion) considering what we ended up against......meaning mainly the tactics used.....
__________________


----------



## Free Range

> Do YOU NOT have to pay to hunt in CO???


Yes and I consider it a tax, call it a fee or a license if you want, it’s still a tax. 




> WE did check with many senior hunters and orgs BEFORE going forward with this, funny thing MOST agreed it was an awesome idea and $5 wouldn't hurt anyone, senior or not, but the addtional funds would HELP all of KY


Cool,



> That IS exactly what they do, match sales(including tags IIRC) SO "adding $.50 to each existing license would NOT accomplish the same thing......nor even close,


Do you have any idea how may licenses are sold in KY each year? I know in the 05/06 season they sold 87,956 senior licenses, so it would only take 879,560 licenses at .50 increase to accomplish the same thing, do you not think the fishing, small game, and the different deer tags all together doesn’t reach that number? I don’t know but thought someone as plugged-in as you would be able to answer that right off the top of your head. 



> Adding $.50 to each one would only add that same .$50 , doing it this way WE add IIRC $10 for every $5 spent........


Are you saying they would have to increase each tag by 5$ to get an additional 10$ of matching fees? Or would increasing 10 tags by .50 still get you an additional 10$ of mataching fees?


----------



## aceoky

Are you saying they would have to increase each tag by 5$ to get an additional 10$ of matching fees? Or would increasing 10 tags by .50 still get you an additional 10$ of mataching fees?


P-R funds Match every ONE sold, SO the more sold the more "free money" obtained, it's not really that complicated.......and the fact remains it IS "working" and hurting no one........where increasing fees "could" affect by decreasing sales, whiich in turn would decrease matching funds......even though prices do increase quite often, it's not the same thing, as the whole point is number sold gets "matched" more= better for every state......period(again, since it's a Federal Law, I assume that it's not different from state to state, but could be incorrect, and since KY recieves NO General Fund $$$ for the KDFWR, it's "doubly important " here.......as the KDFWR are "self -substaining" from these sales.......fwiw

NOW add in the NEW hunters buying cb and accessories for them, plus license and tags...(which get "matched") and it's NOT hard to see how those funds COULD be used for obtaining more public land........you know the funds YOU stated we'd NOT have much if any of...... 


It's also NOT so hard to see why MORE archery hunters IS a 'good thing", more political "clout", more "matching funds", and just maybe even more public land........(In KY WE have a "bonus antlerless tag" which in MANY ZONES can ONLY be used with archery equip.........thus in order to get "matching funds" WE NEED more of these sold......it's easy for those who are "blinded" by "feelings" etc. to not realize all that could be possible by working together.........many are starting to "get it " NOW......and I suspect that will only increase as they're made more aware of all of the facts of the matter.........and Yes, I certainly hope that's the case.....

ALSO that answers the "how" more cb time would result in more antlerless deer killed by archery.......had you understood our Zones you'd have known the answer.......

And even if you take out those additional tags, more licenses sold is still doing a great deal in matching funds.......add them in and it's easy to see, why it's "good".....

So in KY we can have MORE archery hunters spread out over the very long archery season,(IF we did get full expansion; still there is some season to see it in action,though longer would obviously get more involved) bringing in more $$$ and more "matching funds" $$ , NO harm to the resources, and would have NO effect/affect on anyone else's hunting, what they hunt with a "mile away" (archery) won't matter to others........well other than some's "feelings".....

IF one expects MORE public land on which to hunt,it's no stretch to understand land is not "cheap" to buy.....(or long term lease even)......it takes a great deal of $$$ to do that, and public hunting land by intent needs to be in large tracts which makes it harder to find, and more expensive to obtain.........IOW, fhe $$$ MUST be there, before anything can be done......WE are working on that.......and many know I have been for some time, YES some more has been added, but IMHO not nearly enough.....it's a long hard process, but I'm in this for the "long haul" and have no problem admitting more helping would be a great assett.......either way, *I* will continue to do what I can , for what I believe is best for ALL of Ky , ........no matter the issue(s) at the time......

That is honestly where *I* stand .....


----------



## Free Range

> P-R funds Match every ONE sold, SO the more sold the more "free money" obtained, it's not really that complicated.......


Ok just so I understand, for every, one, tag sold, they match you ten dollars, does it matter how much that tag is? Do you get 10$ for every 5$ tag, and 10$ for every 100$ tag sold?


----------



## Silver Pine

_"When non residents have a large say in what goes on in my state, I'm done."_
Marvin - I'm trying to find out why a group of NON-RESIDENTS are complaining about a different group of NON-RESIDENTS becoming involved in Kentucky game law. Same - same in by book. "Pot calling the kettle" kind of thing. You don't want a NON-RESIDENT having a say in your home state of "at my house" but you think its OK to stick your nose across a border into somebody elses business???

Free Range - Same question. Why are NON-RESIDENTS complaining about NON-RESIDENTS being as activly involved in Kentucky hunting as their group of NON-RESIDENTS? 

Anyone else have a handle on this NON-RESIDENT fueding?


----------



## Marvin

*HOld The LINE...ITS YOUR LUCKY DAY*



aceoky said:


> I'll even state it again HAD they worked together with US, on a compromise early on, we'd have gotten less than we ended up with (because we offered a shorter season to "end" this then.........)
> 
> Marvin said "
> 
> ( pretty obvious yoru a liar here since ballard said your group was there) (Make it harder next time to make you the fool)
> 
> That not only doesn't make ANY sense (at least to me) but I'd love to see where Ballard said that.......
> 
> I'm not a liar, by now you should have figured that out, but because you have nothing else you accuse me falsely again and again.......keep it up, IF you think it's helping you in any way
> 
> WE worked (or more honestly TRIED to) to work and a compromise and save the Cornell survey $$$ and in fact had they agreed to one the survey would have never been needed....again they refused believing the survey results would help them (maybe had YOU heard the tapes you'd know this??)
> 
> Bottom line, WE offered several compromised seasons......NONE were accepted (and yes some were shorter than what we ended up with)..........
> 
> ALL of which is well known and I beleive a matter of public record , and if not there are certainly enough audio tapes of this to prove it without any question or doubts......
> 
> Marvin again :"Still bad mouthing, lying and whining."
> 
> NOPE I'm doing NONE of that.......everything I've stated IS fact and easily verified.......period Just because you don't like it concerns me not in the least, and for the record, Yes, I'm a "little bitter" that hunters would go to such extremes against their own kind.......especially over something such as this........I'm not however bitter about what we got (expansion) considering what we ended up against......meaning mainly the tactics used.....
> __________________




I was wrong, you guys were not invited to the compromise BECAUSE YOU CHEATED Can't say I blame them. not sure why a paper of "incomplete member names" would be floating around for everyone to see. Fishy


----------



## Marvin

Silver Pine said:


> _"When non residents have a large say in what goes on in my state, I'm done."_
> Marvin - I'm trying to find out why a group of NON-RESIDENTS are complaining about a different group of NON-RESIDENTS becoming involved in Kentucky game law. Same - same in by book. "Pot calling the kettle" kind of thing. You don't want a NON-RESIDENT having a say in your home state of "at my house" but you think its OK to stick your nose across a border into somebody elses business???
> 
> Free Range - Same question. Why are NON-RESIDENTS complaining about NON-RESIDENTS being as activly involved in Kentucky hunting as their group of NON-RESIDENTS?
> 
> Anyone else have a handle on this NON-RESIDENT fueding?


UH your either to dense or coming to the aid of one of your shortcomings. Like free range said, this is a cancer. it says that hunter is too incompetant to make a decision on game laws. I don't give a rats rear end nor should I have a say in who the govenor of Illinois is. Talk about dirty back door politics. capiche? I don't want this type of thing going on in my state nor your own.


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> JDMiller said:
> 
> 
> 
> JD - That's good to hear that Ronnie is reaching out to UCBK. The LKS should be seeking to encourage participation by EVERY sportsmen organization.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you Ballard, I agree !00% and appreciate you posting your support very much!
Click to expand...


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> I was wrong, you guys were not invited to the compromise BECAUSE YOU CHEATED Can't say I blame them. not sure why a paper of "incomplete member names" would be floating around for everyone to see. Fishy



YES you were wrong then, and you're still wrong, which is why I don't trust you to "keep score"....

WE (nor I) NEVER "cheated".....JD has explained this more than enough for anyone to "grasp it"........read that and learn something, that's a fact rather than misinformation on other internet forums , which btw, IF you'll notice were NOT posted by any officers of the UCBK.....take them for what they're worth...........(not very much since it's proven by the President to be false information......since you couldn't or wouldn't believe me .......another officer of the UCBK btw)

NO one seems to have an answer why WE were not invited, though I have my own suspicions of why......since those INVOVED don't seem to know(or won't say), it's "funny" you "think" you have an answer........


Not one rule was broken, WE are members and have been asked to remain as such........so much for your theories..........on the matter...OUR membership is overwhelmingly Resident.......the rest is moot.....and I'd guess everyone knows that........nice try "no cigar"


----------



## Free Range

Silver pine, I think the point you’re missing is, “we, non-residents” are only here on public forums speaking our mind. The NR’s that Source and Marvin are talking about have actively taken a roll in the voting process of what is going on in another state. I have never contacted the game commission or any legislator in another state or joined a group in another state to try and influence the outcome of any law. And I believe that is the difference.


----------



## aceoky

Silver Pine said:


> _"When non residents have a large say in what goes on in my state, I'm done."_
> Marvin - I'm trying to find out why a group of NON-RESIDENTS are complaining about a different group of NON-RESIDENTS becoming involved in Kentucky game law. Same - same in by book. "Pot calling the kettle" kind of thing. You don't want a NON-RESIDENT having a say in your home state of "at my house" but you think its OK to stick your nose across a border into somebody elses business???
> 
> Free Range - Same question. Why are NON-RESIDENTS complaining about NON-RESIDENTS being as activly involved in Kentucky hunting as their group of NON-RESIDENTS?
> 
> Great question since HE came into the Ky hunting forums and pushed the "idea" that since it wasn't (the survey) 100% for expansion perhaps the season should be split 69% cb and 31% "bow"......which NO doubt gave them some ideas to use, which in fact he had no reason to do......HE gets the "credit" (or blame) for his actions at least...
> 
> Anyone else have a handle on this NON-RESIDENT fueding?


Several have done that and more, including going into Tenn forums AFTER the expansion fighting for why it was "wrong in their opinions"........why??? I also can't understand why those in Co, NY etc. "think" they need to cause more problems and divisions for residents of "said state"(not their own).... confusing and "odd" at best.....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> YES you were wrong then, and you're still wrong, which is why I don't trust you to "keep score"....
> 
> WE (nor I) NEVER "cheated".....JD has explained this more than enough for anyone to "grasp it"........read that and learn something, that's a fact rather than misinformation on other internet forums , which btw, IF you'll notice were NOT posted by any officers of the UCBK.....take them for what they're worth...........(not very much since it's proven by the President to be false information......since you couldn't or wouldn't believe me .......another officer of the UCBK btw)
> 
> NO one seems to have an answer why WE were not invited, though I have my own suspicions of why......since those INVOVED don't seem to know(or won't say), it's "funny" you "think" you have an answer........
> 
> 
> Not one rule was broken, WE are members and have been asked to remain as such........so much for your theories..........on the matter...OUR membership is overwhelmingly Resident.......the rest is moot.....and I'd guess everyone knows that........nice try "no cigar"



if I signed up my llama, dog, cat and pony...i would hve a majority too....you have been in existance 18 months or so ace. 55% is "over whelming" since when? your telling me about mis information on internet forums? Thats really good. Thanks for the laugh. DUH your were excluded because you went the "dirty" route. pretty black and white Mr. conspirancy theory....I'd boot you too.


----------



## ballard

Silver Pine said:


> _"When non residents have a large say in what goes on in my state, I'm done."_
> Marvin - I'm trying to find out why a group of NON-RESIDENTS are complaining about a different group of NON-RESIDENTS becoming involved in Kentucky game law. Same - same in by book. "Pot calling the kettle" kind of thing. You don't want a NON-RESIDENT having a say in your home state of "at my house" but you think its OK to stick your nose across a border into somebody elses business???
> 
> Free Range - Same question. Why are NON-RESIDENTS complaining about NON-RESIDENTS being as activly involved in Kentucky hunting as their group of NON-RESIDENTS?
> 
> Anyone else have a handle on this NON-RESIDENT fueding?


I'm a KY resident and was involved in this issue from day one. Most of us feel it is time to move on, but Ace obviously isn't there yet. He wants to keep fighting about who did what and when. That's his prerogative, but he was the one that started this thread so I think he opened the ball and invited anyone to join the fray. If he wanted to limit the discussion to resident Kentuckians then maybe he should've started this thread on *Kentucky* Hunting.com. 

He wants to argue about how many resident members UCBK has. Well, bully for him. When all this fell out, the UCBK went out of its way to enlist NR members so that they could join the LKS. I have no problems with that, but the fact remains that UCBK would NOT have had a vote in the LKS absent those efforts. The only real point to be made though is that the failure to generate resident support demonstrated how few Kentuckians actually embraced these xbow rule changes. In effect, the argument was: How can you possibly claim that so many Ky sportsmen want an expanded xbow season when you can't even find 25 resident members to join the only pro-xbow organization in the state? 

He also wants to argue that support for SB 211 (which would have maintained the existing xbow season) was based on "misinformation" and "lies". When I appeared on the radio show, it was stated that KDFWR hadn't submitted their regs to the LRC and thus were attempting to circumvent the LRC. KDFWR had in fact submitted the regs (albeit more than a month after they were passed), so that was incorrect. Ace's claim, however, that SB 211's support was based on this incorrect assumption is absurd. 

What he leaves out though is that KDFWR (or someone who supported xbows) had enlisted a diff't state legislator to introduce a bill that would've put the legislator's stamp of imprimatur on the expanded xbow season. Although this bill has little chance of passing, the intended purpose was to send a message to the LRC that the legislature supported the expanded xbow season (which would have, for all practical purposes, stopped the LRC from even thinking about sending the expanded season regs back). This occurred before we even talked with any senators about SB 211, so it was actually the people that were in favor of xbows that first got the legislature invovled. 

I'll stand by everything else.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Silver pine, I think the point you’re missing is, “we, non-residents” are only here on public forums speaking our mind. The NR’s that Source and Marvin are talking about have actively taken a roll in the voting process of what is going on in another state. I have never contacted the game commission or any legislator in another state or joined a group in another state to try and influence the outcome of any law. And I believe that is the difference.



Maybe NOT, but you certainly visited the Ky forums and did your best to influence ANYONE you could while WE were trying to reach a just and fair compromise and in fact did EVERYTHING YOU could to "undermine" those talks , including but not limited to......posting (to me no less) that IF we were to reach a compromise, once WE got "our foot in the door, we'd use that to get the whole thing"(NO that wasn't an attempt to "influence anything" was it ??? .........which first was NOT correct, otherwise we'd NEVER tried to cormpromise having little doubt on the outcome of the survey done by Cornell, (since we KNEW the previous survey results as did everyone, and *I* even explained to YOU and the rest, with over 90% gun hunters who do NOT care about what archery weapons are legal, the survey would almost certainly be more than in our favor......as it was)

All the while KNOWING I worked VERY hard to try to get the groups to work together YOU tried to stop it and then accuse US of "division" when YOU know better.......yes you were in fact more than involved despite MANY repeated attempts of members(read Ky residents) asking you to abstain from this, as it didn't affect YOU and we could handle this ourselves.........deny it all you want, remember I know.......I was right there also, (as were many others)

From the time you "learned" about the expansion deal in KY YOU tried your very best to influence the outcome.......regardless of the facts presented to you.......just as you've TRIED to do here, in fact so it's a "stretch" at best for YOU to claim you NEVER tried to influence laws, seasons or anything else in KY..........

Should I post up the truth from there for ALL to see???

To add CROSSBOW HUNTERS to a CROSSBOW GROUP(UCBK) is NOT the same thing, and many DID and DO still hunt in Ky..........YOU never have......(according to you).........so YES, I'd say you're "more guilty" of "NR violations"
along with Source for giving input to US that WE never asked for nor wanted...........BIG DIFFERENCE on that you sir are correct.....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Maybe NOT, but you certainly visited the Ky forums and did your best to influence ANYONE you could while WE were trying to reach a just and fair compromise and in fact did EVERYTHING YOU could to "undermine" those talks , including but not limited to......posting (to me no less) that IF we were to reach a compromise, once WE got "our foot in the door, we'd use that to get the whole thing"(NO that wasn't an attempt to "influence anything" was it ??? .........which first was NOT correct, otherwise we'd NEVER tried to cormpromise having little doubt on the outcome of the survey done by Cornell, (since we KNEW the previous survey results as did everyone, and *I* even explained to YOU and the rest, with over 90% gun hunters who do NOT care about what archery weapons are legal, the survey would almost certainly be more than in our favor......as it was)
> 
> All the while KNOWING I worked VERY hard to try to get the groups to work together YOU tried to stop it and then accuse US of "division" when YOU know better.......yes you were in fact more than involved despite MANY repeated attempts of members(read Ky residents) asking you to abstain from this, as it didn't affect YOU and we could handle this ourselves.........deny it all you want, remember I know.......I was right there also, (as were many others)
> 
> From the time you "learned" about the expansion deal in KY YOU tried your very best to influence the outcome.......regardless of the facts presented to you.......just as you've TRIED to do here, in fact so it's a "stretch" at best for YOU to claim you NEVER tried to influence laws, seasons or anything else in KY..........
> 
> Should I post up the truth from there for ALL to see???
> 
> To add CROSSBOW HUNTERS to a CROSSBOW GROUP(UCBK) is NOT the same thing, and many DID and DO still hunt in Ky..........YOU never have......(according to you).........so YES, I'd say you're "more guilty" of "NR violations"
> along with Source for giving input to US that WE never asked for nor wanted...........BIG DIFFERENCE on that you sir are correct.....



Yeah Free Range. Just because they did it FIRST does not mean you should be able to do it back to them Shame on you :tongue:


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> I'm a KY resident and was involved in this issue from day one. Most of us feel it is time to move on, but Ace obviously isn't there yet. He wants to keep fighting about who did what and when. That's his prerogative, but he was the one that started this thread so I think he opened the ball and invited anyone to join the fray. If he wanted to limit the discussion to resident Kentuckians then maybe he should've started this thread on *Kentucky* Hunting.com.
> 
> Look at when I started the thread.....
> 
> He wants to argue about how many resident members UCBK has. Well, bully for him. When all this fell out, the UCBK went out of its way to enlist NR members so that they could join the LKS.
> 
> I NEVER disputed that, again, I disputed A) the majoirty of our memership was Canadian....still do in fact B) that the founder of the UCBK was not a Ky Resident, Tom has been as long as I've known him.....pure BS and YES I did and do dispute both of those claims, you know they're false...
> 
> 
> I have no problems with that, but the fact remains that UCBK would NOT have had a vote in the LKS absent those efforts. The only real point to be made though is that the failure to generate resident support demonstrated how few Kentuckians actually embraced these xbow rule changes. In effect, the argument was: How can you possibly claim that so many Ky sportsmen want an expanded xbow season when you can't even find 25 resident members to join the only pro-xbow organization in the state?
> 
> Being "for something" and actually "fighting" for it (especially considering the amount of "flack" myself, JD and Willie, Tom, DJH etc. had encounterd hardly proves anything fwiw, nice try.......but NO point is proven there at all.......had WE been treated in a "civil manner" I'd suspect many would have joined that decided it wasn't worth the hassle(since I've had many, many emails and PMS stating exactly that........fwiw
> 
> He also wants to argue that support for SB 211 (which would have maintained the existing xbow season) was based on "misinformation" and "lies". When I appeared on the radio show, it was stated that KDFWR hadn't submitted their regs to the LRC and thus were attempting to circumvent the LRC. KDFWR had in fact submitted the regs (albeit more than a month after they were passed), so that was incorrect. Ace's claim, however, that SB 211's support was based on this incorrect assumption is absurd.
> 
> Then WHY even go on the radio talk show and ASK for support?? YOU certainly did NOT have much prior to that lie filled show........the REGS had IN FACT been filed for much more than a month and "On Time".........it's "odd" NO one (including YOU or the two Senators on the show seemed to know this FACT......say what YOU wish, fact is the show was filled with utter falsehoods, WE both KNOW that fact......how much support that show and the lies gained is unknown but since THAT was the sole reason for the show, it is NOT "absurd"........I heard the show remember??
> 
> What he leaves out though is that KDFWR (or someone who supported xbows) had enlisted a diff't state legislator to introduce a bill that would've put the legislator's stamp of imprimatur on the expanded xbow season. Although this bill has little chance of passing, the intended purpose was to send a message to the LRC that the legislature supported the expanded xbow season (which would have, for all practical purposes, stopped the LRC from even thinking about sending the expanded season regs back). This occurred before we even talked with any senators about SB 211, so it was actually the people that were in favor of xbows that first got the legislature invovled.
> 
> I had NO part in that, and YOU KNOW < ---- I never supported it......in fact I have ALWAYS fought against them being involved......when avoidable........period
> 
> BTW ONE more "error" on your part, first NO you were not involved (at least no publicly from "day one", ONLY after Tom C. said it was a "done deal" did YOU "step up " and become vocal........to prove him wrong I suspect.........ALSO.........the FIRST involvement of the Lesgialture WAS done in 2005 when the UBK and others went to the LRC "crying" they "didn't know"(yet the same ones had debated this with myself and others for a couple of months prior).......so that "first thing" also is NOT accurate......
> 
> And it HCR 13 IIRC ONLY stated the Ky House strongly favored the KDFWR expansion.........no more no less.......correct??
> 
> I'll stand by everything else.


So, the FIRST time anyone got the Ky Legislature involved WAS the opposition, which ended up in the expansion being repealed.......period......


I should add that the reg Lowebow bolded WAS prior to that changed and changed back due to that very action.....


----------



## Free Range

> Maybe NOT, but you certainly visited the Ky forums and did your best to influence ANYONE you could while WE were trying to reach a just and fair compromise and in fact did EVERYTHING YOU could to "undermine" those talks , including but not limited to......posting (to me no less) that IF we were to reach a compromise, once WE got "our foot in the door, we'd use that to get the whole thing"(NO that wasn't an attempt to "influence anything" was it ??? .........which first was NOT correct, otherwise we'd NEVER tried to cormpromise having little doubt on the outcome of the survey done by Cornell, (since we KNEW the previous survey results as did everyone, and *I* even explained to YOU and the rest, with over 90% gun hunters who do NOT care about what archery weapons are legal, the survey would almost certainly be more than in our favor......as it was


Ace, you are really reaching now, but thank you for putting such a high value on what I said over there. It was an attempt to bring the facts to the people that might be interested in them. And history has shown I was correct. Now that you have your “foot in the door” what has transpired? I could post any number of post by you and others stating “this is not over” and how you will be going for the whole thing, and wait until next year. 



> All the while KNOWING I worked VERY hard to try to get the groups to work together YOU tried to stop it and then accuse US of "division" when YOU know better.......yes you were in fact more than involved despite MANY repeated attempts of members(read Ky residents) asking you to abstain from this, as it didn't affect YOU and we could handle this ourselves.........deny it all you want, remember I know.......I was right there also, (as were many others)


The only ones I remember asking me to abstain was the pro xb people, and I do remember some thanking me for posting my opinion. 



> From the time you "learned" about the expansion deal in KY YOU tried your very best to influence the outcome.......regardless of the facts presented to you.......just as you've TRIED to do here, in fact so it's a "stretch" at best for YOU to claim you NEVER tried to influence laws, seasons or anything else in KY..........


Guilty, in that I tried to influence the people that might have otherwise falling for the un-truths told by your side. I stand by what I said, I never joined any state group, or lobbied any game commissioner or legislator. I think there is a big difference between me posting what I think is the truth so the citizens of your state can read them, and joining a group so that group will have voting rights, that could very likely have an affect on that states laws, BIG DIFFERENCE. 



> Should I post up the truth from there for ALL to see???


Please do, then all can see I posted the exact same thing there as I have here. And will see as I have said that I did not ask any game commission member or any legislator to vote or act in any way. 



> Source for giving input to US that WE never asked for nor wanted


YOU never asked for or wanted but many did.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> So, the FIRST time anyone got the Ky Legislature involved WAS the opposition, which ended up in the expansion being repealed.......period......
> 
> 
> I should add that the reg Lowebow bolded WAS prior to that changed and changed back due to that very action.....


This is a post of desperate men doing desperate things. sad really. such division and strife.


----------



## Free Range

> *had WE been treated in a "civil manner"* I'd suspect many would have joined that decided it wasn't worth the hassle(since I've had many, many emails and PMS stating exactly that........


Read had the other side bent over and said “thank you can I have another” 



> I had NO part in that, and YOU KNOW < ---- I never supported it......in fact I have ALWAYS fought against them being involved......*when avoidable........*


I like that little caveat.


Now back to a real question, Ace you sound like you know a lot about P-R funds. I don’t know much about how they work, could you answer my last question, I really want to know?


----------



## ballard

Ace - I was at the Commission meeting on March 3, 2005. I also attended the public hearing and spoke to the LRC in May 2005. So YES, I was involved from Day One. 

Just b/c you were against the house bill doesn't mean anything. It was filed and sought legislative involvement into our hunting seasons. And, by the way, this house bill was filed BEFORE the expanded season regulations were even submitted to the LRC. I know b/c I looked for the LRC reg submission on the day this bill was filed, and KDFWR hadn't even filed the regs yet. 

Hell, KDFWR hadn't even filed the danged proposed regulations before the pro-xbowers were short-timing it to the legislature.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> There are some trying to keep the other thread on what happened in Ky over the past 18 months or so, that thread isn't probably the best place, so I finally figured out, perhaps another thread would be better.....I apologize to all for not thinking to do this much sooner..
> 
> Doc, (or any other mods) may wish to move all of those comments, over here, and I would appreciate it if that is the case, or if not and they remain there, fine. Whatever you all decide.....
> 
> For those who have actually been reading those KY posts, HERE is yet another problem, that has came up from their tactics.....
> 
> Some are trying to so discredit our own KDFWR, as to accuse them of "dictating" and "holding a gun to their heads"!! Simply because the Dept didn't "bow down to them" over the crossbow expansion issue, and instead listened to the many voices of the majority who wish to have full expansion!
> 
> Their ideas is to try to enforce "term limits"(a "guise" to try to replace those members with some who "see things their way", IF they manage that, I'll be amazed, since we already have "term limits" in place as each new governor appoints several members he/she feels fits their opinions best.....THAT however isn't "good enough", they feel the need to try to personally remove members of the KDFWR commission for voting FOR the majoirty, and against them.....!!!
> 
> WE have TWO surveys, BOTH of which prove by a very large majority what IS wanted........a "few" refuse to accept that, AND wish to punish those members any way possible!!
> 
> So because they can't seem to "get their way", using "fair and honest, tactics", their next course of action is to try to upset an over 50 yr. old system, that has placed KY near the top in Book Bucks (which some seem to really care about), brought back the Elk, and many, many, more positive things........all because the Dept supported the wishes of the majoirity over the minority!
> 
> THAT is the biggest reason why this is still such a "hotbed" issue here in KY! NO matter how much the "pro-side", pushes for Unity, (which *I* even worked toward after this in my mind "bogus" ...."Compromise", right up to they started trying to "rub our noses in them keeping US out of the pre-rut).....WE knew they did it, and suspected it was done 100% for "spite", however, I was willing to just "let it go" and gather data, and explain the data was "tainted" kill numbers wise, because we were not allowed into the pre-rut......their rude and arrogant behavior, along with all of the other things mentioned over a year and a half.....well changed that possibility!
> 
> The fact that once again, THEY are trying to change the entire system, because it worked, *(just not for them, being such a minoirty on this one issue)*, seems again to most (even some on the opposition, and most "fence sitters",) they are cutting thier own noses off to spite their own face, and are proud of it!
> 
> THAT is their idea of "UNITY"......give us what we want, exactly like and how we want it, OR we will do everything possible to disrupt, divide and change the system if need be to in the end try to get our way, we don't care what everyone else wants! ONLY what we want, and we won't allow this......EVER
> 
> I can assure you all, WE have worked long and hard, for unity, and to try to stop this division, regardless of what some try to claim.......it's nearly impossible(if not so) to work with people of that mindset, whatever it takes to "win", even at the cost of us all. .....mentality....and that is exactly what we have faced AND continue to face this much later......that is a fact....



here is your first post ace. looks like your trying to justify you dirty back door dealings exposed and blaming the "other side" for unity. We just pretty much called you out on the several paragraphs of BS contained above. I highlighted a portion above? how come you got beat down at the LKS meetings?


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Ace, you are really reaching now, but thank you for putting such a high value on what I said over there. It was an attempt to bring the facts to the people that might be interested in them. And history has shown I was correct. Now that you have your “foot in the door” what has transpired? I could post any number of post by you and others stating “this is not over” and how you will be going for the whole thing, and wait until next year.
> 
> BIG difference in a compromise WE ALL worked on TOGETHER and what was done.......NOT very hard to undertand, unless it doesn't fit your agenda or "spin"......
> 
> 
> 
> The only ones I remember asking me to abstain was the pro xb people, and I do remember some thanking me for posting my opinion.
> 
> Selective memory?? MANY on the opposition asked both you and source to abstain, "bad memory" or just more of your well known "spin" on the facts??
> 
> 
> 
> Guilty, in that I tried to influence the people that might have otherwise falling for the un-truths told by your side. I stand by what I said, I never joined any state group, or lobbied any game commissioner or legislator. I think there is a big difference between me posting what I think is the truth so the citizens of your state can read them, and joining a group so that group will have voting rights, that could very likely have an affect on that states laws, BIG DIFFERENCE.
> 
> I just love how what you don't know or understand about KY regs is "untruths told".......just like WE don't want the cb in the rut (it's always been allowed fwiw) for ONE simple example, you were asked MANY times by both sides of this to either learn OUR regs or not bother posting......period
> 
> 
> Please do, then all can see I posted the exact same thing there as I have here. And will see as I have said that I did not ask any game commission member or any legislator to vote or act in any way.
> 
> But giving "ideas" to some and stating falsehoods to garner your selfish desires in a state you admit to NEVER hunting in is.....absurd ...fact is was MUCH less any of your business, than our NR membership who Do and did hunt in KY......period
> 
> 
> 
> YOU never asked for or wanted but many did.


Sure they did.......in your dreams.....they were very capable of handling their side of this without your help, which you insisted on giving as long as you were allowed to post.......even though in reality you helped us, more than you harmed us (as you've also been told right here) so I guess it's not a "loss" but to maintanin YOU had no influence or even tried again is more than a simple "stretch" ......plus your many attempts to undermine an honest compromise .............which in fact gave us more time than some seasons WE offered (and allows turkeys which WE took "off the table" early on).....NICE going!


----------



## ballard

Oh yeah, one other point I forgot to mention. It's about all this "compromise" business. 

When there was talk about a xbow compromise last summer, one of UCBK's officers (Tom Conely aka Multidigits) attended a wildlife committee meeting at KDFWR. No xbow opponents were present. 

During that meeting, one of the KDFWR commissioners, who obviously didn't like the fact that anybody had the gall to challenge a Dept decision, stated his belief that the LRC wasn't going to let the expanded season stand. He then instructed Mr. Gassett to get a "compromise" season in place for 2005, so they could shove the entire expanded season down the bowhunter's throats in 2006. 

Did Tom Conely mention this piece of information to anyone? Nope, not a peep (although I'll bet that some other UCBKer's were privy to it). Good faith? Decide for yourself. 

Those meetings were public meetings and were taped. We got a copy of those tapes and fortunately did not agree to this compromise. This is actually what led to the second self-serving survey and the second passage of the expanded season.


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> Oh yeah, one other point I forgot to mention. It's about all this "compromise" business.
> 
> When there was talk about a xbow compromise last summer, one of UCBK's officers (Tom Conely aka Multidigits) attended a wildlife committee meeting at KDFWR. No xbow opponents were present.
> 
> During that meeting, one of the KDFWR commissioners, who obviously didn't like the fact that anybody had the gall to challenge a Dept decision, stated his belief that the LRC wasn't going to let the expanded season stand. He then instructed Mr. Gassett to get a "compromise" season in place for 2005, so they could shove the entire expanded season down the bowhunter's throats in 2006.
> 
> Did Tom Conely mention this piece of information to anyone? Nope, not a peep (although I'll bet that some other UCBKer's were privy to it). Good faith? Decide for yourself.
> 
> Those meetings were public meetings and were taped. We got a copy of those tapes and fortunately did not agree to this compromise. This is actually what led to the second self-serving survey and the second passage of the expanded season.



and YOUR the dirty ones... pretty funny. go figure that multi guy is a hoot for sure. i heard a call in show( jim strater (sp)) he stumbled badly in. too funny.


----------



## aceoky

FR using YOUR figures here: I know in the 05/06 season they sold 87,956 senior licenses

87,956 X $15 = $1,319,340

87,956 X $5 = $ 439,780

QUITE a "difference" wouldn't you say, the bottom figure is what's "paid" compared to the top number total recieved via matching funds IIRC......

So NO adding "so much" would not do the same thing, and in order to get additional matching funds , as I understand it requires MORE sales.....not higher fees per ..........

They only match them once, thus MORE = more money......hope that helps and PROVES why more archery hunters (and more hunters) IS a "good thing" especially since some want MORE Pulic Land to hunt on, which obviously is not free thus takes the $$$ to aquire..........HERE is one good way to do just that......expansion = MORE = MORE political clout AND MORE $$$ simple really......IF one actually looks at the "big picture".......otherwise keep "hoping" for land that can't be bought without the funding........


----------



## Free Range

> BIG difference in a compromise WE ALL worked on TOGETHER and what was done.......NOT very hard to undertand, unless it doesn't fit your agenda or "spin"......


Am I right are there a number of people on your side stating, it’s not over? 



> Selective memory?? MANY on the opposition asked both you and source to abstain, "bad memory" or just more of your well known "spin" on the facts??


Bad memory, please refresh it for me. 



> I just love how what you don't know or understand about KY regs is "untruths told".......just like WE don't want the cb in the rut (it's always been allowed fwiw) for ONE simple example, you were asked MANY times by both sides of this to either learn OUR regs or not bother posting......period


I know you asked me to learn your regs, and I read what was in the posted regs on the web site, beyond that I could care less, and couldn’t be expected to know them as well as a resident.
But please post where someone from our side asked me to learn them or stop posting. 



> But giving "ideas" to some and stating falsehoods to garner your selfish desires in a state you admit to NEVER hunting in is.....absurd ...fact is was MUCH less any of your business, than our NR membership who Do and did hunt in KY......period


Never posted a falsehood, but if I had and it was brought to my attention I surly would correct it. Unlike you, in this very thread. 



> Sure they did.......in your dreams.....they were very capable of handling their side of this without your help, which you insisted on giving as long as you were allowed to post.......even though in reality you helped us, more than you harmed us (as you've also been told right here)


By whom, you?? Now that’s funny. 



> plus your many attempts to undermine an honest compromise .............


Right, was I at the table, no? Oh yeah neither were you. Did I contact anybody with any influence in KY to garner a compromise, No. Did I join any club in KY that had voting rights in the LKS and could influence the game laws, No. But thank you for thinking my word in a public forum caries that much weight, maybe I do carry more influence then I thought. )


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Ace - I was at the Commission meeting on March 3, 2005. I also attended the public hearing and *spoke to the LRC in May 2005.* So YES, I was involved from Day One.
> 
> My mistake, I don't recall seeing YOUR name on those who spoke either way.....(though I did see that my letters were admitted into the record and agreed with)
> 
> So YOU admit to being in on the FIRST run to the legislature, even after saying above it was Rep Meeks bill that was the first attempt (and blamed us)......interesting at least....
> 
> Just b/c you were against the house bill doesn't mean anything. It was filed and sought legislative involvement into our hunting seasons. And, by the way, this house bill was filed BEFORE the expanded season regulations were even submitted to the LRC. I know b/c I looked for the LRC reg submission on the day this bill was filed, and KDFWR hadn't even filed the regs yet.
> 
> IT does mean something to me.....fwiw
> 
> Hell, KDFWR hadn't even filed the danged proposed regulations before the pro-xbowers were short-timing it to the legislature.


Those "pro-xbowers" being the KDFWR, I guess?? And only based upon two surveys showing what the majority of Ky hunters and landowners wanted?? HOw dare they............try to do what is wanted by a vast majority......wow!


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Oh yeah, one other point I forgot to mention. It's about all this "compromise" business.
> 
> When there was talk about a xbow compromise last summer, one of UCBK's officers (Tom Conely aka Multidigits) attended a wildlife committee meeting at KDFWR. No xbow opponents were present.
> 
> During that meeting, one of the KDFWR commissioners, who obviously didn't like the fact that anybody had the gall to challenge a Dept decision, stated his belief that the LRC wasn't going to let the expanded season stand. He then instructed Mr. Gassett to get a "compromise" season in place for 2005, so they could shove the entire expanded season down the bowhunter's throats in 2006.
> 
> Did Tom Conely mention this piece of information to anyone? Nope, not a peep (although I'll bet that some other UCBKer's were privy to it). Good faith? Decide for yourself.
> 
> Those meetings were public meetings and were taped. We got a copy of those tapes and fortunately did not agree to this compromise. This is actually what led to the second self-serving survey and the second passage of the expanded season.


NO actually I heard about it first from your side......secondly ONE of NINE hardly is reason for concern (commisioners stating anything, especially in anger fwiw at least in my view, obviously you guys don't agree that ONE of NINE sitting commisioners ....is not enough to do anything???)

Secondly, WE had NO intentions of backing that idea or claim, as YOU are no doubt aware of, Myself, JD and many others made that more than clear all along........."no sale"......WE only wanted a fair and just compromise.....no more no less.........it never changed despite what anyone else stated, claimed or even threatened.......ever

Also it's important to NOTE, this whole "mess" was AFTER you guys RAN to the LRC.....to stop this.......it also explains why your side LOST the 4 Commision member's votes that you once had???? May as well tell "it all" IF you're going to mention it at all.....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NO actually I heard about it first from your side......secondly ONE of NINE hardly is reason for concern (commisioners stating anything, especially in anger fwiw at least in my view, obviously you guys don't agree that ONE of NINE sitting commisioners ....is not enough to do anything???)
> 
> Secondly, WE had NO intentions of backing that idea or claim, as YOU are no doubt aware of, Myself, JD and many others made that more than clear all along........."no sale"......WE only wanted a fair and just compromise.....no more no less.........it never changed despite what anyone else stated, claimed or even threatened.......ever
> 
> Also it's important to NOTE, this whole "mess" was AFTER you guys RAN to the LRC.....to stop this.......it also explains why your side LOST the 4 Commision member's votes that you once had???? May as well tell "it all" IF you're going to mention it at all.....



you keep stating "fair compromise" but you still want more. Is that UN"fair"?


----------



## aceoky

*Just so everyone KNOWS what Ballard was talking about*

Here is the "whole thing"

BR 499 /HC 13
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION urging an extension of the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey.

WHEREAS, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources has studied extensively the issue of extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey; and

WHEREAS, the department has proposed extending the two crossbow seasons from the historic ten-day framework to coincide with the regular archery season; and

WHEREAS, there is a recognized need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large portion of the state; and

WHEREAS, extending the crossbow-hunting season would not adversely endanger the wild turkey population in the state; and

WHEREAS, a Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources survey found that more than half of respondents surveyed support expansion of the deer and turkey crossbow-hunting seasons; and

WHEREAS, organizations like the Crossbow Advisory Panel and the League of Kentucky Sportsmen deserve recognition for their support and active involvement in this important issue;

NOW, THEREFORE,

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Senate concurring therein:


Section 1. The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky urges the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission and the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources to proceed with extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and turkey.
Section 2. Copies of this Resolution shall be transmitted to Mr. Jon Gassett, commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, and to each member of the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission.

NOT nearly what was tried with SB 211........and most can easily see that fwiw


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Here is the "whole thing"
> 
> BR 499 /HC 13
> A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION urging an extension of the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey.
> 
> WHEREAS, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources has studied extensively the issue of extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey; and
> 
> WHEREAS, the department has proposed extending the two crossbow seasons from the historic ten-day framework to coincide with the regular archery season; and
> 
> WHEREAS, there is a recognized need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large portion of the state; and
> 
> WHEREAS, extending the crossbow-hunting season would not adversely endanger the wild turkey population in the state; and
> 
> WHEREAS, a Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources survey found that more than half of respondents surveyed support expansion of the deer and turkey crossbow-hunting seasons; and
> 
> WHEREAS, organizations like the Crossbow Advisory Panel and the League of Kentucky Sportsmen deserve recognition for their support and active involvement in this important issue;
> 
> NOW, THEREFORE,
> 
> Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Senate concurring therein:
> 
> 
> Section 1. The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky urges the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission and the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources to proceed with extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and turkey.
> Section 2. Copies of this Resolution shall be transmitted to Mr. Jon Gassett, commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, and to each member of the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission.
> 
> NOT nearly what was tried with SB 211........and most can easily see that fwiw



who or what is this Crossbow advisory Panel?? anybody know who was on it?


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Here is the "whole thing"
> 
> BR 499 /HC 13
> A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION urging an extension of the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey.
> 
> WHEREAS, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources has studied extensively the issue of extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey; and
> 
> WHEREAS, the department has proposed extending the two crossbow seasons from the historic ten-day framework to coincide with the regular archery season; and
> 
> WHEREAS, there is a recognized need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large portion of the state; and
> 
> WHEREAS, extending the crossbow-hunting season would not adversely endanger the wild turkey population in the state; and
> 
> WHEREAS, a Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources survey found that more than half of respondents surveyed support expansion of the deer and turkey crossbow-hunting seasons; and
> 
> WHEREAS, organizations like the Crossbow Advisory Panel and the League of Kentucky Sportsmen deserve recognition for their support and active involvement in this important issue;
> 
> NOW, THEREFORE,
> 
> Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Senate concurring therein:
> 
> 
> Section 1. The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky urges the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission and the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources to proceed with extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and turkey.
> Section 2. Copies of this Resolution shall be transmitted to Mr. Jon Gassett, commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, and to each member of the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission.
> 
> NOT nearly what was tried with SB 211........and most can easily see that fwiw


Why are legislators telling the KDFW what to do anyway? I thought ace told me they were a seperate entity with their own money and rules?


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> you keep stating "fair compromise" but you still want more. Is that UN"fair"?



YOU have NO clue about any of this, which is becomming more and more obvious to all, again BIG difference in being involved and NOT being involved......especially IF you (or anyone) expects US to accept something......JUST as the "other side" had IMHO an honest "gripe" for the exact same reason, which IS why.....I tried so hard for a compromise, I listened to them and ACTUALLY heard their concerns......

Fact; it could have and should have been handled in a much better way, the real question is: will WE all learn , or just keep condemming some actions while upholding the same tactics, just because they benefit, in some way what we wanted?????


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> YOU have NO clue about any of this, which is becomming more and more obvious to all, again BIG difference in being involved and NOT being involved......especially IF you (or anyone) expects US to accept something......JUST as the "other side" had IMHO an honest "gripe" for the exact same reason, which IS why.....I tried so hard for a compromise, I listened to them and ACTUALLY heard their concerns......
> 
> Fact; it could have and should have been handled in a much better way, the real question is: will WE all learn , or just keep condemming some actions while upholding the same tactics, just because they benefit, in some way what we wanted?????


Will you stop pushing whining and lying? Why not just be happy with what you got and go your merry way? Its not that easy is it because now its personal. That chip is starting to show again. just because 30 of you feel that way does not make it so. There were people in WACO texas that thought that way too. I am not sure you REALLY want to motivate me too much ace.


----------



## aceoky

I've already stated numerous times I am happy with what we got (at least once today)....it's the HOW.....in which I have issues and problems with.....the point of the whole thread is about that, and the hope that others WILL actually take things to heart and learn from this.......no more and no less.....believe it or not Marvin.....doesn't change it one way or the other.........have a great weekend btw....!!:cocktail:

It's be great IF you'd stop falesly accusing me of lying IN every single post ....it's non productive and insulting and even personal ; I've more than proven, it's been confirmed, that should be "that".....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I've already stated numerous times I am happy with what we got (at least once today)....it's the HOW.....in which I have issues and problems with.....the point of the whole thread is about that, and the hope that others WILL actually take things to heart and learn from this.......no more and no less.....believe it or not Marvin.....doesn't change it one way or the other.........have a great weekend btw....!!:cocktail:
> 
> It's be great IF you'd stop falesly accusing me of lying IN every single post ....it's non productive and insulting and even personal ; I've more than proven, it's been confirmed, that should be "that".....


But you are lying now Ace. my post before this had nothing to do with you. Happy? really? Let me ask you ...did THEY break any rules? You keep harping on tactics whne in fact you house has many mirrors in it


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> But you are lying now Ace. my post before this had nothing to do with you. Happy? really? Let me ask you ...did THEY break any rules? You keep harping on tactics whne in fact you house has many mirrors in it


Obviously your opinion of me,personally; has you biased,that's sad....but changes nothing.......WE tried from the time of the run to the LRC to avoid ALl of this and work TOGETHER....it's easily proven and verified.....period


So, the short answer is; there was NO reason or need to involve the LRC nor draft SB 211, in reality,(or for another expensive survey even).... and it would have been MUCH better for everyone, had WE all worked together on this.......IF hindsight is indeed "20/20" then this should be obvious to everyone.....on either side or neutral.....

Much can be gained by unity, very little good by division, that has always been my stance on this......dispute it if you'd like the truth will stand longer than falsehoods ever hope to ......


----------



## aceoky

*hmmm........imagine that...*

04-25-2005, 08:34 PM 

I also know *other options didn't make out of the meeting at your house*. So I'll stand by what I posted as being correct. *The UBK won't seek a compromise for crossbows in the early part of the season. *

Yes, you've been asked to call Legislators before, but for legislation, not Commission decisions and *not for management decisions*. 

Down the road, when we get the same from the non-hunting and anti-hunting groups, you can look in the mirror and see who to thank. 

Now tell me what part of this is wrong and we'll address it.
__________________

There you go, please note the DATE....


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Ace you seem to think the anti's can not get to the legislation with issues.

Who was responsible for the early raccoon shakeout season being stopped in Ky?


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Selective memory?? MANY on the opposition asked both you and *source *to abstain, "bad memory" or just more of your well known "spin" on the facts?


Now THAT is a lie.

I posted 3 times in a year on KentuckyHunting, and always in response to the bowhunting antichrist DJH.

NOONE ever asked me to abstain. 

Get your FACTS together ... you look like a donkey when you make ridiculous claims such as that.


----------



## aceoky

Mustang I don't "think" any such thing, whether I agree that it's a "good idea" is another matter entirely........big difference......as I have ALWAYS said.....

Source, I'll simply state, it's NOT a lie, it's also the reason YOU were banned from that very forum...(along with someone else btw) 

Deny it all you want......BTW Duster didn't ban you....fwiw NO need for me to lie.......someday you guys will figure out those with FACTS on their side have no reason to need or use lies.......those that don't have 'em .......well again different matter altogether....since I'm still "there" I happen to KNOW the reason (since I asked).....NOW maybe they didn't directly ask YOU.....however the fact IS you're no longer there because of your posting (and it WAS more than any three times a year and directed to more than DJH also).....


----------



## Free Range

Hey guys I’m headed to the CBA Jamboree for the weekend, lots of 3-D shooting and fun for all ages, I’ll be back Monday morning bright and early. You guys have fun and be safe.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> It's be great IF you'd stop falesly accusing me of lying IN every single post ....it's non productive and insulting and even personal ; I've more than proven, it's been confirmed, that should be "that".....


Marvin isn't "falsely accusing".

It has been PROVEN that you lied about the fact that NR were responsible for UCBK joining LKS, and it has been proven that when UCBK joined LKS NR were a majority of club members. So it has been proved that there wasn't enough interest in crossbows among KY sportsmen to generate enough support to form a legitimate club that could join LKS without the underhanded NR recruiting.

You did not tell the truth about ANY of that - even though we already knew it.:darkbeer:


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> Mustang I don't "think" any such thing, whether I agree that it's a "good idea" is another matter entirely........big difference......as I have ALWAYS said.....
> 
> Source, I'll simply state, it's NOT a lie, it's also the reason YOU were banned from that very forum...(along with someone else btw)
> 
> Deny it all you want......BTW Duster didn't ban you....fwiw NO need for me to lie.......someday you guys will figure out those with FACTS on their side have no reason to need or use lies.......those that don't have 'em .......well again different matter altogether....since I'm still "there" I happen to KNOW the reason (since I asked).....NOW maybe they didn't directly ask YOU.....however the fact IS you're no longer there because of your posting (and it WAS more than any three times a year and directed to more than DJH also).....


 I want an answer to my racoon question Ace who got it abolished?


----------



## Free Range

> Deny it all you want......BTW Duster didn't ban you....fwiw NO need for me to lie.......someday you guys will figure out those with FACTS on their side have no reason to need or use lies.......those that don't have 'em .......well again different matter altogether....since I'm still "there" I happen to KNOW the reason (since I asked).....


We all know why you are still there, it could have something to do with the fact, as you like to say, Duster is as pro xb as they get, ask him if he can access the bowsite as duster any more, last time I knew he was banned from there, and I’m still there, what does that tell you? And you shouldn’t throw rocks, you have been banned here for awhile, kind of the pot and kettle thing there isn’t it now Ace.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Source, I'll simply state, it's NOT a lie, it's also the reason YOU were banned from that very forum...(along with someone else btw)
> 
> Deny it all you want......BTW Duster didn't ban you....fwiw NO need for me to lie.......someday you guys will figure out those with FACTS on their side have no reason to need or use lies.......those that don't have 'em .......well again different matter altogether....since I'm still "there" I happen to KNOW the reason (since I asked).....NOW maybe they didn't directly ask YOU.....however the fact IS you're no longer there because of your posting (and it WAS more than any three times a year and directed to more than DJH also).....


You are either totally clueless, lying like crazy, or stoned.:hippie: 

I know how many posts I had on the forum, I know who they were directed at, and I know that the only reason I was removed was because I had a contrary opinion - I was actually being quite polite, dispite what you infer.

You crowing and celebrating about your side's gestapo tactics and censorship does not exactly inspire confidence that you are trying to mend any fences. 

I'll tell you straight to your face - you are LYING about this.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Marvin isn't "falsely accusing".
> 
> Wrong once again
> 
> It has been PROVEN that you lied about the fact that NR were responsible for UCBK joining LKS, and it has been proven that when UCBK joined LKS NR were a majority of club members. So it has been proved that there wasn't enough interest in crossbows among KY sportsmen to generate enough support to form a legitimate club that could join LKS without the underhanded NR recruiting.
> 
> You did not tell the truth about ANY of that - even though we already knew it.:darkbeer:


Maybe it's "proven" in your " mind"....... I stated again and again, stand behind it, Canadians WERE NEVER a majority, that was the lie, NOT NR.....do you ever get anything close to correct source???

Nothing "underhanded" or even unusual has taken place.......had you paid attention JD explained that at least a couple of time, and PROVED you wrong on all your counts........sheesh.......the "spin" never ends with some of you....... 

NO "not enough interest " was NOT proven by Ky residents had you paid attention you'd KNOW many who were for the expansion remained silent after seeing what WE went through.........hope you keep up on NY issues much better.........'cause you certainly don't have any clue about KY.....even after pages of information PROVING you are wrong........deal with it :darkbeer: 

And please stay on topic, these repeated attempts to end this thread are sad......


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> You are either totally clueless, lying like crazy, or stoned.:hippie:
> 
> I know how many posts I had on the forum, I know who they were directed at, and I know that the only reason I was removed was because I had a contrary opinion - I was actually being quite polite, dispite what you infer.
> 
> You crowing and celebrating about your side's gestapo tactics and censorship does not exactly inspire confidence that you are trying to mend any fences.
> 
> I'll tell you straight to your face - you are LYING about this.


 #2 04-27-2006, 08:39 PM 
thesource 
Banned Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7 



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

Agreed...Good news.

Crossbows should always be allowed when guns are permitted. The controversy stems when only bows are permitted.

#9 05-02-2006, 04:48 PM 
thesource 
Banned Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7 



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

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDMiller
.... they were bowhunters 


exactly.....they were bowhunters.

#11 05-02-2006, 09:23 PM 
thesource 
Banned Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7 



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

Quote:
Originally Posted by JDMiller
thesource......what exactly is your definition of a bowhunter???

I've been slinging arrows since 1978 and bowhunted deer before I ever gun hunted. As I type .... I'm looking at a Mathews Legacy hanging on the top of my bow rack 



Bowhunter


Quote:
Originally Posted by JDMiller
with my Parker crossbow hanging below. 



Not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JDMiller
Its outlined with about a dozen Beeman ICS400 28 1/2" shafts with yellow & white 4" feathers that I fletched myself. 



Bowhunter


Quote:
Originally Posted by JDMiller
Mixed in with those Beemans are about a dozen 20" Super Carbon Magnum Bolts with 5" yellow & white feathers. 


Not.


I am a bowhunter. When I pick up my Remington or my flintlock for gun or MZ season, I am not.

It's not difficult to understand. To be a bowhunter, you must hold and draw....a bow.
ANYthing else .... is not.

There (to your face) IS three posts and NOT anywhere NEAR a YEAR.......I could prove it more and show the "negative comments made" about your posts but there is no need, you call me a liar and just that quick I show three posts and notice the duration between them.......source.......no offense but "liar" is a strong word, and shouldn't really be used nearly so often imho

AND yet another point JD Miller is NOT DJH.......fwiw (Yet YOU stated you ONLY answered him.......yeah I'm the liar NOT)


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Maybe it's "proven" in your " mind"....... I stated again and again, stand behind it, Canadians WERE NEVER a majority, that was the lie, NOT NR.....do you ever get anything close to correct source???


Ahhh. I see. You will attempt to hide behind semantics. I know for a fact that the vast majority of the time when I am busting your chops on this issue, I say Canadians and NR. You still tried to tell the same story.

Ace - you have been exposed for exactly what you are. By all means, feel free to squirm and wiggle. You cannot escape the absolute pounding that your credibility has taken because of this issue. You were proven wrong by your own man, JDMiller, when he admitted that the canadians and NR were actually THE enabling force to join LKS. 

Its all over. You look stupid because of the things you have claimed and/or denied. I am ROFLMAO .... at you.



aceoky said:


> Nothing "underhanded" or even unusual has taken place.......had you paid attention JD explained that at least a couple of time, and PROVED you wrong on all your counts........sheesh.......the "spin" never ends with some of you.......


MY spin, yea ... that's it. 

We can all see the way UCBK played its hand. It wasn't illegal, but it WAS disgusting. I think its dirty.



aceoky said:


> NO "not enough interest " was NOT proven by Ky residents had you paid attention you'd KNOW many who were for the expansion remained silent after seeing what WE went through.........


Ha ha ha. You are funny.
I paid attention to you CLAIMING that was true. Given your track record with NR and alien members of UCBK enabling the entry into LKS, I think we had better finsd a second (and significantly more reputable) source before anyone believes it. 



aceoky said:


> hope you keep up on NY issues much better.........'cause you certainly don't have any clue about KY.....even after pages of information PROVING you are wrong........deal with it :darkbeer:


Sadly, the pages of information show that you haven't been truthful, and that out of staters know a heck of a lot more about what happened with UCBK and KY than you appear to.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> There (to your face) IS three posts and NOT anywhere NEAR a YEAR.......I could prove it more and show the "negative comments made" about your posts but there is no need, you call me a liar and just that quick I show three posts and notice the duration between them.......source.......no offense but "liar" is a strong word, and shouldn't really be used nearly so often imho


You SHOULD do it. Show me where I made negative comments and deserved to be removed.

I honestly don't recall posting much at all on the forum, but I will be man enough to admit I am wrong.

I apologize for claiming that you lied about more than 3 posts and posting to anyone other than DJH.

You still need to show some evidence of why I was kicked out to prove that you are not still just making all this stuff up, though.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> You SHOULD do it. Show me where I made negative comments and deserved to be removed.
> 
> I honestly don't recall posting much at all on the forum, but I will be man enough to admit I am wrong.
> 
> I apologize for claiming that you lied about more than 3 posts and posting to anyone other than DJH.
> 
> You still need to show some evidence of why I was kicked out to prove that you are not still just making all this stuff up, though.


Apology accepted , and thank you!!!


NOPE not going "there" I've proven (once again) that I'm NO liar....(which was my sole purpose that's done, and so am I with this part of this) :cocktail: 

....as for your other claims, JD "backed up" exactly what I stated, period.....he knows (as I do) the truth, Marvin NOT only claimed the UCBK was made up by a MAJORITY OF CANADIANS but also the founder was not a Ky resident.......none of that was true....you continue to claim I stated WE never had NR majority, that's NOT true, I stated WE don't have, JD Miller *(the President ) confirmed that by stating 95% ARE KY residents.....

NOW you "spin" that any way you choose won't matter to or affect me in any way.......again

Nice try "no cigar"......:darkbeer: 

I KNOW you hate being so wrong so often , but that part is out of "my hands"....:cocktail: :wink:


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> We all know why you are still there, it could have something to do with the fact, as you like to say, Duster is as pro xb as they get, ask him if he can access the bowsite as duster any more, last time I knew he was banned from there, and I’m still there, what does that tell you? And you shouldn’t throw rocks, you have been banned here for awhile, kind of the pot and kettle thing there isn’t it now Ace.


PROVE I was ever banned from here AGAIN, IF I ever was it's news to me......why not stick with facts.......is it really so hard??

And even IF true (which I'd suspect I'd have known.....being gone somewhere and not online is NOT being banned.....and I'd think I would have had some notification which I never recieved so I think that's misinformation again at best.........YOU even admitted maybe you were wrong then so why continue to make the claim......HOW do YOU seem to KNOW when I don't know anything about this supposed ban???) .....

.....it has NOTHING to do with MY sticking my nose into another state's business which IS what caused your problems......we all know this to be true......


----------



## Free Range

It’s the same reason I was banned, they don’t like it when someone shows them to be the purveyors of miss information they are on that site. Ace cannot show where I or you said anything near as negative or did anything near as antagonistic as he and the rest of the pro guys did there. They found a willing accomplice in Duster and a few others there and ran ruff shod over anyone that didn’t tote the xb line.


----------



## Free Range

All I can say is a mod told me in a PM you and Marvin was in a “time out” when I asked them why you hadn’t been posting. If that mod reads this and wants to post in public why or when you were that’s up to them. 



> .....it has NOTHING to do with MY sticking my nose into another state's business which IS what caused your problems......we all know this to be true......


No it was showing you and Duster that there are Real Facts and there are your supposed Facts.


----------



## spec

Free Range- you are SOOOOOOO right!


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> All I can say is a mod told me in a PM you and Marvin was in a “time out” when I asked them why you hadn’t been posting. If that mod reads this and wants to post in public why or when you were that’s up to them.
> 
> I have no idea what you were or werre not told in PM I only know I'm not now or ever aware of ever being banned anywhere, I try very hard to follow the rules
> 
> 
> 
> No it was showing you and Duster that there are Real Facts and there are your supposed Facts.


MY facts are backed up with REAL DATA .....hard data from various sources.....yours isn't and never was, mainly (as here) it's YOUR "interpretation" of expert data, which most (including myself) don't think you have the qualifications to make ......funny how every single time you're proven wrong your next response it to allow guns for the entire archery season.........yeah that helps....... 

IT was after all a CROSSBOW forum with RULES clearly posted (two sets in all) which neither took seriously, THAT is the "why" .....not the sillly other things......IOW it was not the place for you to "explain" why everyone else was "so wrong".....and you were "so right", it got old (and trust me from both sides they got somplaints whatever you "think" is the case.....)


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> ....as for your other claims, JD "backed up" exactly what I stated, period.....he knows (as I do) the truth, Marvin NOT only claimed the UCBK was made up by a MAJORITY OF CANADIANS but also the founder was not a Ky resident.......none of that was true....you continue to claim I stated WE never had NR majority, that's NOT true, I stated WE don't have, JD Miller *(the President ) confirmed that by stating 95% ARE KY residents.....


Typical and sickening.

You know you were proven wrong but you hide behind the skirts of semantics,

DOES EVERYONE OUT THERE SEE WHAT KIND OF CHARACTER WE ARE DEALING WITH HERE?

Yuck.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> I have no idea what you were or werre not told in PM I only know I'm not now or ever aware of ever being banned anywhere, I try very hard to follow the rules


Funny - you are the only person on the board I know who made several threats to different members .... that's definitely not following the rules.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> IOW it was not the place for you to "explain" why everyone else was "so wrong".....and you were "so right", it got old


Why don't you simply call a spade a spade? It was censorship, plain and simple. You and your boys became tired of getting your hiney's kicked when others pointed out the fallacy of your "facts."


----------



## aceoky

*See?*

#36 03-08-2005, 11:53 AM 

Join Date: Oct 2004



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

Have you ever wondered why your UBK membership is only 400 of the hunters in Kentucky?



*I was once a member but chose not to renew my membership. The following are the reasons why:*


I don not presume to know the opinion of all of the individual members, however, the leadership has made its opinion widely known. Basically, you are in favor of bow hunting only. 

You look upon anyone who uses a crossbow, muzzleloader, or modern firearm as a slob. You say that your mission is to preserve the tradition of bow hunting. However, you fail to understand that this can be done without being against those who choose to use a different weapon.

A compound bow is not a traditional weapon, why are you not against its use. Note that there is no question mark after the last sentence as it is rhetorical. 

I know you will say, because you still have to draw a compound bow. Well that does not hold water. Crossbows were around hundreds, if not thousands of years before the compound bow was invented. Considering that, it seems evident that the crossbow is much more traditional that the compound bow, yet you are against is use. Consider that for yourselves!



Consider this as well. Your organizations name is United Bowhunters of Kentucky. It is not say United Longbow Hunters of Kentucky, United Recurve Bow Hunters of Kentucky, United Compound Bow Hunters of Kentucky, let alone United Cross Bow Hunters of Kentucky. Remember that a Crossbow is still a bow. This to me seems to be very close-minded. 



Your public persona is that you only want to allow people who hunt with Longbows, Recurve bows or Compound bows. 

*You are continually trying to change the dates of the season to give you the best opportunity and forget about the other hunters in Kentucky who enjoy the outdoors.*

I submit that it is the arrogant, elitist message given by the leadership of the UBK that has limited your membership to a measly 400.

It is my understanding it's even less now????



I do not believe that it has anything to do with advertising or any other administrative issue at which you may point. 

It pains me to see that an organization that could be used to promote the outdoors and turning it into an organization of elitists and naysayers that end up discouraging others from hunting if they do not use the weapon of which your organization approves.



*It should be every hunter's goal to recruit hunters into the woods so they can appreciate the pleasure offered by the outdoors. Instead, you end up discouraging 99% of the people who hear your message because of its arrogant content.*


I would rather hunt or harvest a dear with a bow than any other weapon. I currently use a compound bow and have hopes of one day using only a long bow. However, I still enjoy hunting with the other legal weapons allowed by the regulations.

Most bow hunters share my opinion. They too like to enjoy the outdoors with the bow along with other weapons. 

This is why your membership is such a small representation of hunters in Kentucky.



This is why the Anti-hunters will eventually win. We cannot live and let live within our own ranks long enough to recruit others to the outdoors, let alone fight the Anti-hunters. 

In 20 or 30 years when we have lost or privilege to hunt you will look back in shameful reflection on all of the infighting.



As long as the herd is healthy and can handle the Crossbow, why not allow it during archery season. There is no reasonable argument to disallow its use. 



Live and let live, I say. If you do not want to use a crossbow, then do not. Do not even allow it use on property that you own. In regards to public grounds, well, we all pay taxes and should have the right to use the crossbow if we so chose.



My request is this: Please get out and enjoy the outdoors. Recruit others to do the same. However, do not deny someone else the enjoyment offered by the outdoors just because they use a weapon of which you do not approve.



I ask with respect for your feelings and hope that your will in turn respect my and others feelings as well.

Note the date and realize THAT is and was the point......I promised to post this some time ago, I aplogize for not getting to it before now......


----------



## aceoky

HERE is the reply to that from the UBK VP:

26 years ago *UBK was formed to battle down crossbows. That was the sole reason for it's formation. *

One of the reasons I personally stepped up into the VP position and will surely run for Prez. is to make changes in the organization. I've only been a member for 3 years myself and have already seen changes. When I joined I got comments about my compound like "when you gonna get a real bow?" You don't hear that stuff anymore. I won't tollerate it. We are bowhunters UNITED. The KTBA (KY Traditional Bowhunters Assoc.) exists if you want a traditional only club.

UBK is not a club. It is a political organization put together to preserve, protect and promote bowhunting.


'Nuff said............sole reason........imagine that......NOW try to believe WE didn't do EVERYTHING possiblle to compromise and they would NOT consider it....


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Typical and sickening.
> 
> You know you were proven wrong but you hide behind the skirts of semantics,
> 
> DOES EVERYONE OUT THERE SEE WHAT KIND OF CHARACTER WE ARE DEALING WITH HERE?
> 
> Yuck.


That's funny, especially coming from you, thanks for the laugh btw:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Funny - you are the only person on the board I know who made several threats to different members .... that's definitely not following the rules.



NO truth at all in that statenment whatever.......I ASKED you if you acted like a bully in person or not.......YOU tried to say it was a threat, others even told you right here it wasn't...... give up the misinformation...it's "way old" and again PLEASE stick to the topic, I know you want this thread locked others may like to find out some facts(even though they don't suit your "agenda"......thanks in advance.....

Wanna talk about the Tenn forum?? :wink: 

FACT is; both you and FR have made it a habit to push your views on other states hunters and for some time,I know most know this fact......that's NOT censorship........ just weeding out those who's opinions matter not.....


----------



## aceoky

NOW please consider this (back on topic of what actually occured in KY)

#45 *03-08-2005,* 03:13 PM 

Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: , Ky.
Posts: 1,562 



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

I've stayed out of this crossbow thing from the start. I've kept up with it but until today nothing I saw ever changed my mind.


I noticed right off the bat something that turned my stomach as a hunter who's fought for gun and hunting rights all my life.

""The sportsmen and women of the state deserve to have the issue decided by them, not by the biologists or anyone else""


That is using the very same argument that PETA, HSUS and other anti-hunting organizations used for years against hunters and hunting in general.

*Once the Commission passed something and they didn't like it they want to go over their head to the Gov and State Legislature.

This is the very same tactics the anti-hunters use.*
Sorry guys, but this turns me off hearing that hunters are going to be doing the same things anti-hunters do.


Before today I didn't care if crossbows got in or not and I have been a serious archery hunter for years, heck I spend almost $1,000 on my last set up.

But after seeing this is the way people want to go over the heads then I have to say I'm now pro-crossbow and I will let my Commissioner as well as the Gov and my State Rpresenatives know.

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

More proof the opposition in fact caused the division by running to them......as I stated all along


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> NO truth at all in that statenment whatever.......I ASKED you if you acted like a bully in person or not.........


You know that's not exactly what you said,,,,

How about the time you told an AT member that you knew where he lived? Was THAT a threat - cause it sure sounded like one to me and the moderator who told you to cut the crap......

I am still an active member of TNdeer. I have actually hunted in TN - have you? You make me laugh with your hilarious little sidetracks...

The fact is that you have nbeen caught HERE, not telling the truth - skirting it most times, breaking it sometimes. I'm sure the readers know the actual score ..... :cocktail:


----------



## thesource

I find it amusing that some chuckleheads in the world do not understand the difference between opinion and proof.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Ace , since you are so informed on this issue. You tell everyone who got this crossbow expansion rolling in the first place. That my friend is who is responsible for dividing the sportsman .


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> I find it amusing that some chuckleheads in the world do not understand the difference between opinion and proof.


DO you realize how silly that is?? YOU and Marvin got your "information" on the UCBK from a forum (not a Ky one though) these ARE from Ky forum and IF you'd bother to notice the dates you'd realize this was AFTER the first time the FULL EXPANSION was to become law, and the "other side" was going to the Legislature to stop expansion........which they in fact DID....do

It's a matter of public record , check the dates if in doubt.........

Let's see now,so far, among other things...... I've shown one member who left the UBK over this issue (rest assured he's not the only one by far either)......THEY did the end run to the Legislature,(which Ballard already admitted to even being a part of in May 2005 posted right here in this very thread......yeah......guess you might have a point, but I seriously doubt it......) 

OH and the UBK exists solely to fight crossbow expansion.........yeah they should have " a voice" in this.....against the KDFWR and the Majority........ 

Place those with the other things I've proven (including matching P-R funds to be gained from this) and PLEASE explain how fighting expansion, with the tactics used helped anyone.......this should be "interesting" since that IS the point of the entire thread.....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Obviously your opinion of me,personally; has you biased,that's sad....but changes nothing.......WE tried from the time of the run to the LRC to avoid ALl of this and work TOGETHER....it's easily proven and verified.....period
> 
> 
> So, the short answer is; there was NO reason or need to involve the LRC nor draft SB 211, in reality,(or for another expensive survey even).... and it would have been MUCH better for everyone, had WE all worked together on this.......IF hindsight is indeed "20/20" then this should be obvious to everyone.....on either side or neutral.....
> 
> Much can be gained by unity, very little good by division, that has always been my stance on this......dispute it if you'd like the truth will stand longer than falsehoods ever hope to ......


and teh question is STILL unanswered. Did they do anything Illegal? Yes or no will suffice but realize it is not possible with you.


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> Ace , since you are so informed on this issue. You tell everyone who got this crossbow expansion rolling in the first place. That my friend is who is responsible for dividing the sportsman .



Uh........that would be KY HUNTERS who asked the Dept since at least 1999 for MORE time with the crossbow ......a well known fact which I've stated many many times and a few I believe right here in this very thread......point?? 

WHO asked for compounds to be included......oh Hunters.....imagine that....same exact thing....period.......

And with the NEW compounds ; since they're allowed NO good reason for ANY of this division on the cb.......much less where it has taken too many good people(who ARE hunters btw).......

BTW, NON of that IS relevent NOW...the expansion DID in fact occur despite the best attempts at some to thwart it....the process and tactics used however are Important......to many who just may avoid some of OUR problems and mistakes on both sides during this............

AT least I hope some will at least read these and try to learn from the many facts presented......

And it serves no good purpose imho to "spin" the facts and make false claims, what happened IS public record plus WE have the tapes of it all........NO way to dispute any of it with real facts.....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> DO you realize how silly that is?? YOU and Marvin got your "information" on the UCBK from a forum (not a Ky one though) these ARE from Ky forum and IF you'd bother to notice the dates you'd realize this was AFTER the first time the FULL EXPANSION was to become law, and the "other side" was going to the Legislature to stop expansion........which they in fact DID....do
> 
> It's a matter of public record , check the dates if in doubt.........
> 
> Let's see now,so far, among other things...... I've shown one member who left the UBK over this issue (rest assured he's not the only one by far either)......THEY did the end run to the Legislature,(which Ballard already admitted to even being a part of in May 2005 posted right here in this very thread......yeah......guess you might have a point, but I seriously doubt it......)
> 
> OH and the UBK exists solely to fight crossbow expansion.........yeah they should have " a voice" in this.....against the KDFWR and the Majority........
> 
> Place those with the other things I've proven (including matching P-R funds to be gained from this) and PLEASE explain how fighting expansion, with the tactics used helped anyone.......this should be "interesting" since that IS the point of the entire thread.....


I got the information from a noted crossbow forum and a Kentucky forum. Most of it came from you internet mouthpiece. Thanks for caring though


----------



## thesource

Acoeky -

You put a couple posts up from who knows who. and claim it as bulletpoof? 

J-O-K-E.

You have been totally discredited by your slimy handling of the UCBK NR issue.

Why should anyone believe a single word you say? I know I don't....you are just another activist trying to further your own personal agenda.

We all see you for what you are - give up the pretense. Noone really cares what you say.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Uh........that would be KY HUNTERS who asked the Dept since at least 1999 for MORE time with the crossbow ......a well known fact which I've stated many many times and a few I believe right here in this very thread......point??
> 
> WHO asked for compounds to be included......oh Hunters.....imagine that....same exact thing....period.......
> 
> And with the NEW compounds ; since they're allowed NO good reason for ANY of this division on the cb.......much less where it has taken too many good people(who ARE hunters btw).......
> 
> BTW, NON of that IS relevent NOW...the expansion DID in fact occur despite the best attempts at some to thwart it....the process and tactics used however are Important......to many who just may avoid some of OUR problems and mistakes on both sides during this............
> AT least I hope some will at least read these and try to learn from the many facts presented......
> 
> And it serves no good purpose imho to "spin" the facts and make false claims, what happened IS public record plus WE have the tapes of it all........NO way to dispute any of it with real facts.....


RIGHT...you got tapes and links to back them up. Your a crack up. Free Range promptl back handed you into submission stating all these facts and nothing to back them up. Instead its the tired old " i posted them already in some far away land, Go look them up" . Your suppposed to throw out the bong water ace.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> and teh question is STILL unanswered. Did they do anything Illegal? Yes or no will suffice but realize it is not possible with you.


NO not that I'm aware of.......

Which in NO way negates the risks their action have placed on our future soley from their collective actions, and over a "small matter" which should have and could have been easily resolved by working together... which IS a concern even now, and as I've shown WAS then.......did they listen NO.......they involved the Legislature (set a legal precedent on seasons).......NOT "smart" in many's opinion (including a Lawyer who posted numerous times on the Ky forum it was a "very bad idea" among other things........this Lawyer btw has been very active in F&W matters for a very long time.......he was against the expansion and even MORE against these moves.)......that is also a fact easily confirmed btw.......

SO NO.....not that I'm aware of....doesnt' make it "right" nor "wise" or "prudent" now does it??


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> Acoeky -
> 
> You put a couple posts up from who knows who. and claim it as bulletpoof?
> 
> J-O-K-E.
> 
> You have been totally discredited by your slimy handling of the UCBK NR issue.
> 
> Why should anyone believe a single word you say? I know I don't....you are just another activist trying to further your own personal agenda.
> 
> We all see you for what you are - give up the pretense. Noone really cares what you say.


how much is he gtting paid out of this source? lets compare figures.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NO not that I'm aware of.......
> 
> Which in NO way negates the risks their action have placed on our future soley from their collective actions, and over a "small matter" which should have and could have been easily resolved by working together... which IS a concern even now, and as I've shown WAS then.......did they listen NO.......they involved the Legislature (set a legal precedent on seasons).......NOT "smart" in many's opinion (including a Lawyer who posted numerous times on the Ky forum it was a "very bad idea" among other things........this Lawyer btw has been very active in F&W matters for a very long time.......he was against the expansion and even MORE against these moves.)......that is also a fact easily confirmed btw.......
> 
> SO NO.....not that I'm aware of....doesnt' make it "right" nor "wise" or "prudent" now does it??


Risks...blah, blah , blah. you just gave Peta the blueprint to influence Kentucky politics. Your actions FORCED thiers. that should intestinal fortatude and a love and passion for bowhunting. Nothing like the backhanded and dirty tricks you pulled to win. What were these lawyers opinions on how your side handled it?


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Acoeky -
> 
> You put a couple posts up from who knows who. and claim it as bulletpoof?
> 
> J-O-K-E.
> 
> You have been totally discredited by your slimy handling of the UCBK NR issue.
> 
> Why should anyone believe a single word you say? I know I don't....you are just another activist trying to further your own personal agenda.
> 
> We all see you for what you are - give up the pretense. Noone really cares what you say.


You sir are very much entitled to your opinion......and nothing I did was "slimy" again, can't you debate with SOME facts rather than unfounded accusations and such??? 

Again, it's proven when I stated the UCBK membership was NEVER a majority of Canadians , was founded by a Ky resiedent (Tom C) and it WAS mostly Ky residents was true (As confirmed by the UCBK president) YOUR attempts to mislead are simply amazing and yet very amuzing, thinking anyone can't see through them!! 

Oh NOW you speak for everyone? I feel very sorry for "everyone" if that's true (which I seriously doubt)

I'm not the one been caught on several occasions changing QUOTES etc. to fit what I wanted.......that was YOU, so I find it great you don't accept my facts, based on what I've seen of yours that's a "good thing" for mine....:cocktail:


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> You sir are very much entitled to your opinion......and nothing I did was "slimy" again, can't you debate with SOME facts rather than unfounded accusations and such???
> 
> Again, it's proven when I stated the UCBK membership was NEVER a majority of Canadians , was founded by a Ky resiedent (Tom C) and it WAS mostly Ky residents was true (As confirmed by the UCBK president) YOUR attempts to mislead are simply amazing and yet very amuzing, thinking anyone can't see through them!!
> 
> Oh NOW you speak for everyone? I feel very sorry for "everyone" if that's true (which I seriously doubt)
> 
> I'm not the one been caught on several occasions changing QUOTES etc. to fit what I wanted.......that was YOU, so I find it great you don't accept my facts, based on what I've seen of yours that's a "good thing" for mine....:cocktail:


from majority to mostly now....I see ...... "we" seem to be shrinking.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> You sir are very much entitled to your opinion......and nothing I did was "slimy" again, can't you debate with SOME facts rather than unfounded accusations and such???


How about the FACT that you still try to pawn off your culpability of saying the majority were not KY sportsmen by claiming you only meant canadians?

How about the FACT that you could not get enough KY sportsmen to form a club and enter the LKS without having Willie (a NON resident) recruit other non residents to join and make UCNK a salient organization?

How about the FACT that while you correctly claim that Willie didn't found the UCBK, he pulled ALL the strings to bring it into existence?

How about the FACT that you know darn well that UCBK could not have even gotten off the ground without Canadian assistance, yet you deny the role that Canadians (most, if not all of which have never stepped foot in KY), but refuse to admit it.

I have encountered bottom feeders before, and I know the games they try to play.

You will be called on each one, forced too create endless new and deeper lies to cover your slimy tracks. It'll catch up with you, I have no doubt.

Double yuck.


----------



## Marvin

Lets recap Ace's fall from grace

1) free range solicited other websites to rant against x-bows. Said it was not fair
(which he has done on just about every board he is a memeber of)

2) Calls a Majority as 55%. 

3) Knowingly recruited out of state and non us memebers to start a club to cancel out the UBK votes.

4) Constantly whines about the "dirty back door dealings" that the UBK did ( even though it was NOT ILLEGAL. Yet says soliciting non residents and canadians is okay to influence his states sportsman. 

And he wants UNITY ( snickering in the background)


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Risks...blah, blah , blah. you just gave Peta the blueprint to influence Kentucky politics.
> 
> Your actions FORCED thiers.
> 
> NOT true nor even close to it......
> 
> that should intestinal fortatude and a love and passion for bowhunting. Nothing like the backhanded and dirty tricks you pulled to win. What were these lawyers opinions on how your side handled it?


Total 100% *unfounded* BS!

THEY used the "dirty tricks" and I couldn't care less what "motivated them" to do so.....right is "right" ; and there WAS a process to handle this without going "there" as Ballard stated they were NOT going to compromise because ONE (of NINE) commisioners said something they didnt' like in anger......WE had nothing to do with that btw....

in the first place WE (UCBK) didn't exist yet (and I had NO part in this at that time) once again you prove you have NO clue......in the second place, the Regs had been printed BEFORE it was ever fought, on the *false claims *they didnt' know this would allow the crossbow for the entire archery seaoson , while the whole time those making these claims were getting letter writing ideas out (and in public no less)and taking other actions against it........but they didn't know anything about it?? 

I only mentioned one lawyer and explained the facts of the matter as he posted his feelings on the matter, and again he's active and involved with game and fish matters for several decades and was in fact former president of the N*** in Ky.........if you were really interested..... He agreed with me(and US) that IF it was "done wrong" once, two wrongs don't make a right (speaking of WE never did those things and doing them only served to do what they had complained about) .......

Source THOSE quotes are (as you no doubt know) ARE from a Ky hunting forum, from the time of the first "go -around" on this expansion.......showing how people felt AFTER it was thought to be "over and done with".....no less!! 

NOT when we were still fighting on it, it HAD already passed been printed(the new full archery crossbow season) both on the NET and the Ky Afield mag at least at this time again look at the dates of the posts........


The expansion fight is "over" , we won more time, that's the "short version" of it, and for that I'm glad, I had the hope that others would learn something from all of this, but I can see some are intent on getting the thread locked,which would help no one to see how things could have been much better handled.......


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> from majority to mostly now....I see ...... "we" seem to be shrinking.



I'd say our 95% KY RESIDENT membership IS a majority, you don't agree??:cocktail: 

See I NEVER said when, I ONLY siad WE are by a majoirty Ky memberhisp org (and we ARE as JD has proven).......I guess some need to work on reading comprehension before trying to make a "case" of what was NOT said ever......hmmm imagine that more "spin".....hard to believe


----------



## thesource

Marvin said:


> And he wants UNITY ( snickering in the background)



Unity? He's too busy burning bridges.

Why in the world would any reasonable bowhunter want to cozy up to UCBK when the shrill siren of Aceoky is sounding?

He and his club have done irreparable damage to bowhunting. Don't like it? Cheat 'till you get it....

Triple Yuck.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I'd say our 95% KY RESIDENT membership IS a majority, you don't agree??:cocktail:
> 
> See I NEVER said when, I ONLY siad WE are by a majoirty Ky memberhisp org (and we ARE as JD has proven).......I guess some need to work on reading comprehension before trying to make a "case" of what was NOT said ever......hmmm imagine that more "spin".....hard to believe


sure, you have the advantage of now...How about when you joined the LKS? Go ahead and lie your way out of that one. All we have to do is go to JD post


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Total 100% *unfounded* BS!
> 
> THEY used the "dirty tricks" and I couldn't care less what "motivated them" to do so.....right is "right" ; and there WAS a process to handle this without going "there" as Ballard stated they were NOT going to compromise because ONE (of NINE) commisioners said something they didnt' like in anger......WE had nothing to do with that btw....
> 
> in the first place WE (UCBK) didn't exist yet (and I had NO part in this at that time) once again you prove you have NO clue......in the second place, the Regs had been printed BEFORE it was ever fought, on the *false claims *they didnt' know this would allow the crossbow for the entire archery seaoson , while the whole time those making these claims were getting letter writing ideas out (and in public no less)and taking other actions against it........but they didn't know anything about it??
> 
> I only mentioned one lawyer and explained the facts of the matter as he posted his feelings on the matter, and again he's active and involved with game and fish matters for several decades and was in fact former president of the N*** in Ky.........if you were really interested..... He agreed with me(and US) that IF it was "done wrong" once, two wrongs don't make a right (speaking of WE never did those things and doing them only served to do what they had complained about) .......
> 
> Source THOSE quotes are (as you no doubt know) ARE from a Ky hunting forum, from the time of the first "go -around" on this expansion.......showing how people felt AFTER it was thought to be "over and done with".....no less!!
> 
> NOT when we were still fighting on it, it HAD already passed been printed(the new full archery crossbow season) both on the NET and the Ky Afield mag at least at this time again look at the dates of the posts........
> 
> 
> The expansion fight is "over" , we won more time, that's the "short version" of it, and for that I'm glad, I had the hope that others would learn something from all of this, but I can see some are intent on getting the thread locked,which would help no one to see how things could have been much better handled.......


Yeah the UBK jsut sat around and thought they might try do that. this shows your lack of perception in your actions( but your sure can see others 20/20) that's myopic i believe. You there are those that ar concerned for your mental well being and now I am too.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Total 100% *unfounded* BS!
> 
> THEY used the "dirty tricks" and I couldn't care less what "motivated them" to do so.....


Ahhhhh. I see. If "they" used dirty tricks, then all principles and ethics can be kicked to the curb.

You are using their alledged "dirty tricks" to justify you own dirty tricks.

Sorry - that crap doesn't fly here. Dirty is dirty, and you know you were wrong.

You will feel better if you just admit it....


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> Ahhhhh. I see. If "they" used dirty tricks, then all principles and ethics can be kicked to the curb.
> 
> You are using their alledged "dirty tricks" to justify you own dirty tricks.
> 
> Sorry - that crap doesn't fly here. Dirty is dirty, and you know you were wrong.
> 
> You will feel better if you just admit it....


never happen. its always someone elses fault source you know that.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> How about the FACT that you still try to pawn off your culpability of saying the majority were not KY sportsmen by claiming you only meant canadians?
> 
> 
> IT wasn't *I* who made the false claim that the MAJORITY of our membership was Canadian, I disputed it, then and still do.......deal with the truth IF you can manage it...
> 
> How about the FACT that you could not get enough KY sportsmen to form a club and enter the LKS without having Willie (a NON resident) recruit other non residents to join and make UCNK a salient organization?
> 
> Since WE DID get the Ky membership that's not a very good nor valid point is it now? Again JD explained the deadline and other issues, non of that matters NOW does it?? NOPE, with 95% KY membership, time to let that issue "rest" once and for all, makes those who can't see the difference look "petty"
> 
> How about the FACT that while you correctly claim that Willie didn't found the UCBK, he pulled ALL the strings to bring it into existence?
> 
> Again NOT true, Willie in fact (again) was and is a "driving force" which WE are all proud to have as a member, but THAT is a "stretch" even for you to try to claim.......sheesh YOU should have asked JD who ALL worked to do this or that......why didnt' you....OH that would have left you no "wiggle room" for your "spin" and misinformation.......now I get it
> 
> How about the FACT that you know darn well that UCBK could not have even gotten off the ground without Canadian assistance, yet you deny the role that Canadians (most, if not all of which have never stepped foot in KY), but refuse to admit it.
> 
> Please show me where I ever stated that .....I in FACT stated we DID have *some* Canadian members but the posts that they were the majority were FALSE.......I stand by that now and always btw
> 
> I have encountered bottom feeders before, and I know the games they try to play.
> 
> Birds of a feather" you mean?:cocktail:
> 
> You will be called on each one, forced too create endless new and deeper lies to cover your slimy tracks. It'll catch up with you, I have no doubt.
> 
> Double yuck.


Backatcha.......


----------



## Marvin

willie said:


> Nope...
> 
> It is never "over"..
> 
> See you next year and if necessary the year after, etc.......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Ace I thought it was over. your mouth piece has run amuck. Make up your mind.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> IT wasn't *I* who made the false claim that the MAJORITY of our membership was Canadian, I disputed it, then and still do.......deal with the truth IF you can manage it...


Tsssk, tsssk. True colors, shining through? 

You may not have made the claim that the majority of your membership was canadian, but you sure as heck were not forthcoming that the MAJORITY OF YOUR MEMBERSHIP WAS NONRESIDENT OR CANADIAN, were you?

Ah, ah, ahhhhhh. Nasty little bit of politics, that. In fact you twisted, and turned, quoted current membership ratios instead of the true data that you knew all along, trying to prevent the truth from coming out.

YUCK. There are words for people like you.:zip:


----------



## Marvin

JD miller

The UCBK was started by Tom C. and my records show the membership began in late March & early April of 2005. This was right after the first vote by the commission and the beginning of the majority of opposition. Most all established sporting clubs are affiliate members of the LKS. This requires a minimum of 25 members to qualify. The deadline on submitting your membership info is in May...I believe. At this point we had a few members but *needed more **to beat the deadline*. Willie posted the membership info on a few crossbow forums and this is where we got the non resident membership. 

I have a copy of what was submitted to the LKS in 2005 and I think that is what Ballard has seen and commented on. *It shows 29 members and after checking the addresses....its about 10 residents. *

so your fibbing again ace. no nonresidents, no votes


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Lets recap Ace's fall from grace
> 
> 1) free range solicited other websites to rant against x-bows. Said it was not fair
> (which he has done on just about every board he is a memeber of)
> 
> 2) Calls a Majority as 55%.
> 
> 55% IS a majoirty, YOU stated the UCBK had a Majority membership of Canadians it wasn't ever true I told you so, you continued with the falsehoods.....period, NOW You'd like to change Canadians to NR, not what you said.....
> 
> 3) Knowingly recruited out of state and non us memebers to start a club to cancel out the UBK votes.
> 
> Show me PLEASE where I (or any other officer at the time) did so.......AGAIN, our individual members are more than free to ask for more members I don't see that as a problem IF you do, please suggest what WE (officers) should do to our members trying to increase OUR numbers.......silly claims and yet hoping some would "buy them" .....in FACT, most orgs have many NR members, yes even many Ky clubs who ARE LKS members btw AGAIN (yet once more) WE didn't do anything "new" or anything that hasn't been done often before.......numbers matter and before the "deadline" most know that and many take members to get there in time......NOT "new" nor dishonest despite your "spin"
> 
> Also the "cancel out votes" is absurd and in fact already answered by JD Miller, and it's such a "stretch" anyway, WE are only one club(two votes) there were already TWO BOW CLUBS, thus one still canceled out OUR votes(by your reasoning) As JD tried to explain the LKS part was to be taken serious NO more NO less.....again nice try "no cigar"
> 
> 4) Constantly whines about the "dirty back door dealings" that the UBK did ( even though it was NOT ILLEGAL. Yet says soliciting non residents and canadians is okay to influence his states sportsman.
> 
> BIG difference in setting LEGAL PRECEDNENTS and asking people to join the UCBK , perhaps one day you'll understand what they did was so bad and why.......'till then, not much I can do at this point, had you known and understood Ky regs and Statutes (as the mentioned Lawyer does) you'd KNOW
> 
> And he wants UNITY ( snickering in the background)


YES I do , and I expect to get it somewhat as well, again had you any clue you'd know most of us have worked well together in the past and likely will again in the future, just because we don't agree on ONE non-issue , doesn't change that ......


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Tsssk, tsssk. True colors, shining through?
> 
> You may not have made the claim that the majority of your membership was canadian, but you sure as heck were not forthcoming that the MAJORITY OF YOUR MEMBERSHIP WAS NONRESIDENT OR CANADIAN, were you?
> 
> NOPE no good reason to do so, since (yet again) OUR membership has been majority KY residents for some time now.....too bad for you guys I guess trying to make a "big deal" about how we were formed, AND keep in mind those of us who were already LKS members in other clubs or federations do NOT count for this.......AS JD explained already so the ten means NOT already LKS members........try to "keep up" can ya??
> 
> Ah, ah, ahhhhhh. Nasty little bit of politics, that. In fact you twisted, and turned, quoted current membership ratios instead of the true data that you knew all along, trying to prevent the truth from coming out.
> 
> Not at all, I found it not to be relevent (see above)
> 
> YUCK. There are words for people like you.:zip:


As they are for others as well........


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> JD miller
> 
> The UCBK was started by Tom C. and my records show the membership began in late March & early April of 2005. This was right after the first vote by the commission and the beginning of the majority of opposition. Most all established sporting clubs are affiliate members of the LKS. This requires a minimum of 25 members to qualify. The deadline on submitting your membership info is in May...I believe. At this point we had a few members but *needed more **to beat the deadline*. Willie posted the membership info on a few crossbow forums and this is where we got the non resident membership.
> 
> I have a copy of what was submitted to the LKS in 2005 and I think that is what Ballard has seen and commented on. *It shows 29 members and after checking the addresses....its about 10 residents. *
> 
> so your fibbing again ace. no nonresidents, no votes


Nope not "fibbing" I stated Canadians were NEVER the MAJORITY of UCBK membership (as YOU claimed, based on the "net forums" as you put it I think)....YOU called me a liar (as you're still doing) when the fact IS proven it was never Canadian Majority, now IF you meant NR instead, I can't help you there, however it no longer matters with a 95% KY resident membership.....and everyone knows it.....:cocktail:


----------



## thesource

Marvin said:


> Knowingly recruited out of state and non us memebers to start a club to cancel out the UBK votes.





aceoky said:


> Show me PLEASE where I (or any other officer at the time) did so......


Eeeeeew!ukey: 

You knew it was going on, you condoned it, the president posted on Excalibur how much he appreciated it ...... 

Good grief. The members here at AT are not stupid. They can see through your flimsy charade and now know exactly what you and the UCBK stand for.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> it no longer matters with a 95% KY resident membership.....and everyone knows it.....:cocktail:


No.

You mean "it no longer matters since we successfully cheated our way into LKS and got (almost all) the expansion we wanted at the expense of true KY bowhunters statewide", don't you? 
Yuck.


----------



## aceoky

Also check out (if it's still there)

Posted February 6, 2005 on bowsite – Kentucky forum…

http://www.bowsite.com/bowsite/tf/re...ES=35&state=KY

For a bit more proof they did know about it (unlike they claimed at the time, )

Also from Ky hunting:

The hunters of the state filled out a survey and the majority wanted crossbows added.

You got the fair vote you wanted. Same protocal as before on all other issues.

Your implying the Agenda was hidden. Wasn't long ago that the Agendas weren't even posted on the Internet. Cyberhunters got that changed and it comes from the Commissioners Office. You basicly calling the Commissioner a cheat for not posting what you want to see posted. Had you attended the Committee meeting, you would have known what the Action Item was addressing. You also knew by Feb. 27, because you posted it on your own message board.

You said "and the majority should decide.. (OF COURSE Digits and Whillikers dont believe that apparently)" Take a minute, look at the survey, and then look at the vote. The commissioners voted how they did for a reason. You want to whine about the results because you lost.

The biologist that the dept. has are some of the best. Your saying they are incompetent. They advise the Commission, the commission makes the rules based on the data. No, you can't let hunters make the biological decisions needed to manage the herd and flock.

As for you own ignorance to the rule change, your way off base. You can look at this web site and see posts by several of the UBK panel that you had on the show. They knew it. 

Now considering they KNEW about it (but acted as if they didn't AFTER they lost (thinking they would not).....please explain how that was "right" , much less the tactics used after that.........that's sad and a very valuable lesson to be learned imho for those on either side fwiw


----------



## thesource

What the heck are you talking about?


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> No.
> 
> You mean "it no longer matters since we successfully cheated our way into LKS and got (almost all) the expansion we wanted at the expense of true KY bowhunters statewide", don't you?
> Yuck.


NO

Once again source is "talking out of school" we were NOT the first to use NR to get the 25 needed, and we are NOT "cheaters" (as you classify all cb users anyway, so that's expected from your narrow view of other hunters)...

It's not relevent with a 95% Ky Resident membership your repeated rants about the past accomplish nothing postive nor even help you in any way, WE had the Ky membership (just after the deadling silly , silly ideas you "push").. WE also have many more Ky members NOW, and I suspect with the LKS backing us so proudly, we'll increase for years to come, too bad for you and your side, I'm certain, but great for US and KY and the LKS........:cocktail: 

YOU start a new club that close to a deadline , see IF YOU can do any better, then come on back and "throw stones"........deal??? LOL

Easy to find fault when you're doing nothing positive to make a difference another one entirely when you ARE........something to be said about knowing of where one speaks before "casting stones unknown" .....try it then tell us all about it, or drop it ..........

IF all you can do is tell others how things should be done, without actually doing anything as usual your opinion (as Jim C says) lacks credibility 100%...........

I agree AT members are NOT stupid......I also trust they can see "spin" when it's as obvious as this is.......better luck next time........think you're going to need it

Oh and BTW "bowhunters" by a majoirty ARE for expansion, ONLY those bow clubs which exist SOLEY (as the UBK VP admitted btw) WERE fighting this at the time.......yet again "nice try....no cigar":cocktail: :darkbeer:


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> Uh........that would be KY HUNTERS who asked the Dept since at least 1999 for MORE time with the crossbow ......a well known fact which I've stated many many times and a few I believe right here in this very thread......point??
> 
> WHO asked for compounds to be included......oh Hunters.....imagine that....same exact thing....period.......
> 
> And with the NEW compounds ; since they're allowed NO good reason for ANY of this division on the cb.......much less where it has taken too many good people(who ARE hunters btw).......
> 
> BTW, NON of that IS relevent NOW...the expansion DID in fact occur despite the best attempts at some to thwart it....the process and tactics used however are Important......to many who just may avoid some of OUR problems and mistakes on both sides during this............
> 
> AT least I hope some will at least read these and try to learn from the many facts presented......
> 
> And it serves no good purpose imho to "spin" the facts and make false claims, what happened IS public record plus WE have the tapes of it all........NO way to dispute any of it with real facts.....


 Now Ace I know better than that and you do to. Tell the truth ,the power behind this quagmire


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Ahhhhh. I see. If "they" used dirty tricks, then all principles and ethics can be kicked to the curb.
> 
> You are using their alledged "dirty tricks" to justify you own dirty tricks.
> 
> Sorry - that crap doesn't fly here. Dirty is dirty, and you know you were wrong.
> 
> You will feel better if you just admit it....


NO first WE NEVER used any "dirty tricks" their dirty tricks are the why we now exist, to give other hunters (NOT ONLY "bow hunters) a valid voice in this matter since it was the "bow groups" fighting this..........man you are "way off base " yet again........sheesh impossible to make it any clearer than it should already be......I've even shown posts from when this was supposed to be "over" the FIRST time to confirm what is posted here, still you can't seem to grasp it, sorry not my problem......

I (nor the UCBK) WERE EVER wrong , we did what we needed to do to give a voice for the Majority of sportsman/women of Ky.......IF you "think" that's "wrong" again , you're entitled to your opinion.........but most everyone knows IF we were anti-expansion you'd never go "there".... 

Nothing they done is "alleged" it's fact and easily verified (Ballard has admitted to much of them right here and recently fwiw, even saying he's proud of them!).......

At NO time did any of us use "dirty tricks", Tom was ASKED to attend that meeting Ballard brought up, IF others were not, that in NO way affects us, and he's one person .........not nearly the same thing as has went on with "back door deals" secret compromise meetings leaving out the UCBK, (but not the UBK, KBIA, nor even Jim Stader) .......interesting thing really,how Jim Stader always stated " A compromise is when BOTH parties sit down and work out a soloution they BOTH can live with"........but without us there HE agreed to this one!!! Yep you' d like to include US in that type of situation but can't........because WE always were above board and honest throughout the entire process, despite your "spin"......the facts haven't changed and in fact had a great deal to do with what WE ended up with, by "playing by the established rules in place" and NOT trying to "go around them" as they in fact did on several occasions...........:cocktail: :darkbeer: :darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> Now Ace I know better than that and you do to. Tell the truth ,the power behind this quagmire


REALLY? then I guess you can explain this (from the Cornell crossbow survey top of the page, check for yourself, I don't need to I KNOW it was being discussed LONG before 2005,IF you don't do some more checking then get back to me OK?):cocktail: 

1. Purpose The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources *(KDFWR) has received numerous requests over the past 5 years to extend the crossbow-hunting season. *

Additionally, the KDFWR recognizes a need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large percentage of the state. In 2002, the KDFWR conducted a hunter survey that was mailed to 13,500 hunters in Kentucky – 

Guess what you "know" isn't what the KDFWR says is it now??? This is "Old News" btw, Plenty of people knew this was "in the works" prior to the expanded season IF they "keep up", it was NEVER "hidden"......was openly discussed for YEARS......just as that proves......look for yourself


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> What the heck are you talking about?


What happened in Ky......."lost again" I see! Those are still from the "first go around" on the expansion, funny how some can FIGHT it, then claim they didn't know about it AFTER they lost......yep they're on the "up and up" and the UCBK wasn't........ 

Spin won't EVER win (my new motto!) :darkbeer: :darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

*Pandora's Box......*

* 03-14-2005,* 02:33 PM 




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

Quote:
Originally Posted by adam
I swore I'd stay out of this,but what the hell.
I have many friends on both sides of this issue,so I decided to stay out of it,because I didn't really have a dog in this fight.I'm not a serious deer hunter-I guess I'm one of the few that still does it for the fun of it. 



OK,we're past all of that now:The commission has made its ruling.Believe me,they have done some things that make us all unhappy.Forget about the crossbows for a minute....


*We now have a user group attempting to bypass our DFW and seek "justice" from the hands of politicians

.Do you realize how dangerous this is?!*

If you don't,you need to look at other states.California,*Colorado,*Wisconsin,New Jersey etc.There are strong anti-hunting elements in those states.(We aren't there yet,but we are well on our way with increased urbanization and development,and the influx of liberal carpetbaggers.)

Point is,bear hunts,leghold traps,and bowhunting have all come under attack,and the anti's have been successful through court injunctions,interference from the governor (Whitman and McGreevey both fought the bear hunt in New Jersey),legislation (i.e.classfying quail and doves as "songbirds"),and te most dreaded of all ballet box referendums (That is what happens when democracy controls wildlife instead of biology-i.e. the Disney channel and CBS news make the decision ).

*This happened because the sovereignity and independence of those respective wildife agencies was compromised,undermined or otherwise f--k-d by somebody.

Both the deer farmers and UBK have flirted with this.*

I will go on record as saying,


"Should any group or individual be successful in *circumventing* our comission,wildlife agency,or existing management policy-making system,I will hold said group or individual personally responsible for any negative repercussions that will occur later down the road.

I will also endorse the permanent expulsion of that group or individual from the League of Kentucky Sportsmen."


,*And should bowhunting come under attack later on down the road,because of the situation you createdI will remember who tore the lid off of Pandora's box..... *

NOW Marvin, maybe you can realize who DID in fact do what you'd like to blame on the UCBK, I didn't write one word of that........note the date please.....and REALIZE this was AFTER it was a "done deal" (or was by law supposed to have been)........NOT The UCBK.......'twas the UBK and some Cervid ranchers BOTH groups tried (and failed THIS time to "get their way" by hoping to change the HOW of how things are done In KY)

Whatever your feelings are about me, try to read the above with an open mind again noting the date posted.....on kyhunting, and it's not hard to see the who and what was then taking place NOR how dangerous it was (and still remains because of their actions).....thanks in advance


----------



## spec

So now we are back to needing to harvest more deer and the crossbow is here to save the day. What ever happened to the good 'ol "better weapon for women and children" argument that was hot and heavy? That kinda got dropped after expansion was received. Some sure made it sound good by touting more opportunities and more $$$ in the dept coffers.


----------



## aceoky

Yes I know these are old posts, but they do prove what in fact WAS going on AFTER the votes and the season WAS expanded, agian WE can ALL ( I hope) learn some very valuable lessons from ALL of this.......if not at least I tried.......


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> REALLY? then I guess you can explain this (from the Cornell crossbow survey top of the page, check for yourself, I don't need to I KNOW it was being discussed LONG before 2005,IF you don't do some more checking then get back to me OK?):cocktail:
> 
> 1. Purpose The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources *(KDFWR) has received numerous requests over the past 5 years to extend the crossbow-hunting season. *
> 
> Additionally, the KDFWR recognizes a need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large percentage of the state. In 2002, the KDFWR conducted a hunter survey that was mailed to 13,500 hunters in Kentucky –
> 
> Guess what you "know" isn't what the KDFWR says is it now??? This is "Old News" btw, Plenty of people knew this was "in the works" prior to the expanded season IF they "keep up", it was NEVER "hidden"......was openly discussed for YEARS......just as that proves......look for yourself


 I mean from the very beginning Ace. Tell us I know you know.
And can you prove that the dept. was ever in favor of or offered a compromise?


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> RIGHT...you got tapes and links to back them up. Your a crack up. Free Range promptl back handed you into submission stating all these facts and nothing to back them up. Instead its the tired old " i posted them already in some far away land, Go look them up" . Your suppposed to throw out the bong water ace.


FR sure he did......... 

As for the tapes, I beleive JD Miller mentioned them before I did, NO matter WE have 'em, Ballard has some as well, maybe you should ask him???


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> I mean from the very beginning Ace. Tell us I know you know.
> 
> I posted the truth of what it WAS all about as far as I know.......
> 
> And can you prove that the dept. was ever in favor of or offered a compromise?


YES, I can very easily, the Crossbow Advisary Panel and the "round table discussion for example, ask Terry (Daking) he was on that (and he's not even a crossbow shooter either fwiw) They asked for input ON a compromise that each group would accept.......We made offers the Dept said they'd accept, the "other groups" turned them ALL down........then when WE had the Cornell survey the "from gun season on" was half heartedly offered, by then THAT was a "no sale" for obvious reasons, then the Unanimous Commision vote for FULL expansion..... Most know this is fact; and also Know I was fighting all along for unity and working together for something we could ALL live with....


----------



## aceoky

*03-15-2005*, 07:22 PM 
aceoky 
12 Pointer Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Whitley County KY.
Posts: 4,150 


Wow! 

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

Quote:
Originally Posted by gwhilikerz
Willie and Adam, You guys have said more and said it plainer in your last posts than any of us have done yet. Thank you for showing exactly what the dangers are and what the results could be. 


Agreed!!!!!


That's what I've been saying as well!(just not often, as I'm ashamed of what we've became) 
I would have never thought I'd see the day when a (read this part s-l-o-w-l-y now) CHOICE of another weapon(still an archery weapon, ) could cause so much division among our own.


Also I'm simply confounded that any GROUP (hunting group that is) would be silly enough to WANT the politicians making these decisions!!!!

CHOICE is supposed to be a good thing , and is only for the FREE??? 


I've been a "bowhunter" for some time, and I for one can't see "what all the fuss is about" , IF YOU want to hunt with a compound, recurve or even a longbow, fine! BUT, to insist that IS THE ONLY bowhunting has NO merit IMHO, and shouldn't even be discussed! 

*All this is doing is making enemies where there were freinds, and that helps HOW?*

Again I ask(respectfuly), see what DOES ACTUALLY happen, then with some FACTS, make a case(if there is one), then you can be taken more seriously, at present, *you're fighting what passed *on ASSUMPTIONS


*What can we expect (positive) from this division*? 

*It's simple to see the negatives that have already taken place, hunters are a brotherhood/sisterhood, and that's how it should remain, *this........ IF you don't shoot what *I*, shoot, then you're NOT a hunter is pure BS, and has NO place IMHO in our ranks EVER!! 


*It's simply another choice of weapon, nothing more, give it a FAIR chance, after all it passed, and it's the regs for now, so, why keep fighting amongst ourselves??*

*BTW, I also have "no dog in the fight" at present,* but I fail to see what they(crossbows)are going to hurt, and I'm quite certain, that I'm not alone in this!
__________________

Now everyone can see the date on that post AND what I asked for (again this was at that time thought to be a "done deal" ) the FACT remains, it's very easy to see even back then and EVEN BEFORE they stopped this *I* was in fact asking for unity.....even then, despite false claims to the contrary.....Also you might also notice at that time I was NOT fighting FOR them (nor against them)........'twas AFTER they made the end run to the LRC and decided to circumvent the process, that *I* became actively, and vocaly involved, again contrary to what some have stated.......also that was the cause of the UCBK being formed, WE were told WE needed a group to be taken "seriously" on this......against the UBK and KBA , so we did....it's no secret, really, but I wanted to prove, what I've always stated about this whole "mess".......again many lessons should be learned, will they be???:cocktail:


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Did they not plan on full expansion the first time around. The seasons were already released before it was pulled.


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> So now we are back to needing to harvest more deer and the crossbow is here to save the day. What ever happened to the good 'ol "better weapon for women and children" argument that was hot and heavy? That kinda got dropped after expansion was received. Some sure made it sound good by touting more opportunities and more $$$ in the dept coffers.


NO *none* of that has changed, where did you get that idea anyway???

BTW, it IS women, children and elderly hunters fwiw......funny how the "other side" can't even get that one correct.....especially since I've mentioned them so very often AND mentioned their contribution in "matching funds" nearly as often, many of these would be NEW archery hunters as well, which means more matching funds......yet anther reason for not fighting this, much less using the tactics used.....


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> Did they not plan on full expansion the first time around. The seasons were already released before it was pulled.


And your "point is"?? 

Check and see HOW the ML changes WERE in fact done, turkey season changes etc........ nothing "new or unusual" was done here despite the rampant rumors(only started to gain support by those opposed *after* they lost)

The EXACT SAME process was used as has been for over 50 years....check for yourself IF you doubt that, Tom(multi) stated it enough that when NO one disputed it (hard to beleive isnt' it).....LOL to make anyone who didn't know it, have a hard time not after those posts.......


----------



## spec

Not falling for the "new" hunter idea. The elderly you speak of will not be "new" hunters, perhaps a different weapon. The kids you speak of will have already started with a firearm(without the string) and you are dreaming if anyone thinks the number of new license buyers will be a large number of females.


----------



## Jim C

spec said:


> Not falling for the "new" hunter idea. The elderly you speak of will not be "new" hunters, perhaps a different weapon. The kids you speak of will have already started with a firearm(without the string) and you are dreaming if anyone thinks the number of new license buyers will be a large number of females.



so then why are so many of you whining about overcrowding?

I like the bs of a gun without a string-that sort of tells me all I need to know


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> so then why are so many of you whining about overcrowding?
> 
> I like the bs of a gun without a string-that sort of tells me all I need to know


Great points/post as is usual!!!


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> And your "point is"??
> 
> Check and see HOW the ML changes WERE in fact done, turkey season changes etc........ nothing "new or unusual" was done here despite the rampant rumors(only started to gain support by those opposed *after* they lost)
> 
> The EXACT SAME process was used as has been for over 50 years....check for yourself IF you doubt that, Tom(multi) stated it enough that when NO one disputed it (hard to beleive isnt' it).....LOL to make anyone who didn't know it, have a hard time not after those posts.......


 My point is you keep saying "we" offered a compromise. The dept had full expansion in mind.
The ml was not expanded over and entire archery season was it old toothless one?


----------



## Jim C

aceoky said:


> Great points/post as is usual!!!


its easy to drill the line of Feeling (its not thinking) that they exhibit.

there are two reasons that motivate the opposition

1) too many people in "our season"

2) xbow archers "cheapen" our standing as the elite, the proud-the bowhunter

when you are dealing with greed or self esteem issues, facts have a nasty habit of getting in the way


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> so then why are so many of you whining about overcrowding?
> 
> I like the bs of a gun without a string-that sort of tells me all I need to know


 Jim, have you ever hunted public land in Ky. You need to remember some have to hunt on public land.


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> My point is you keep saying "we" offered a compromise. The dept had full expansion in mind.
> The ml was not expanded over and entire archery season was it old toothless one?


YES ML has expanded (or changed) how could you not know that......

"old toothless one"?????????????? I'm NOT that old, nor "toothless" .

YES the Dept had FULL expansion in mind(no secret either) and they passed it didn't they?? :cocktail: 

the other side RAN to the legislature and managed to cause enough problems for the Dept to seek a compromise, which NEVER happened thus forcing them to do the Cornell survey to obtain MORE proof it was wanted, still THAT wasn't "enough" for some of you.......it's insane, the very tactics used over this whole mess.......period..... for someone claiming to KNOW so much about this, you're really confused it seems???

OLd NEWS now anyway.......what it is, it is......still the lessons to be learned yet remain.......wonder IF they will be learned???


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> Jim, have you ever hunted public land in Ky. You need to remember some have to hunt on public land.


IF that were honestly a concern, YOU guys would have been helping US trying to obtain more P-R funds to work toward buying MORE Public land, yet you continue to fight this even after it's been explained so often.......and it makes NO sense to "complain" but refuse to take positive actions as you keep on doing even now........

YOU want more land, then help to produce the $$$ from which to fund it, IOW don't fight things that WILL help to generate that needed $$$ such as the cb expansion, MORE P-R funds = More $$$, which I have been trying to get used for MORE Public land, rather than fight EVERY good idea which would produce those very $$$$ as some have done and continue to do.......

Land, they are not making any more of it, it's expensive........takes many $$$$ to get enough to make a difference, guess that's NOT an issue so long as "others" aren't allowed in "your woods or your season"??? 

I however know this and look at the "big picture" of wanting it is only the first step........things must be done to aquire the funding..........and the land must be found in big enough tracts.........all of which WE have been working on for some time, rather than complaining about it......fwiw


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Jim, have you ever hunted public land in Ky. You need to remember some have to hunt on public land.



Yes-many years ago. 

that is no reason to have created a wrongful bigotry towards crossbows.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> YES ML has expanded (or changed) how could you not know that......
> 
> "old toothless one"?????????????? I'm NOT that old, nor "toothless" .
> 
> YES the Dept had FULL expansion in mind(no secret either) and they passed it didn't they?? :cocktail:
> 
> the other side RAN to the legislature and managed to cause enough problems for the Dept to seek a compromise, which NEVER happened thus forcing them to do the Cornell survey to obtain MORE proof it was wanted, still THAT wasn't "enough" for some of you.......it's insane, the very tactics used over this whole mess.......period..... for someone claiming to KNOW so much about this, you're really confused it seems???
> 
> OLd NEWS now anyway.......what it is, it is......still the lessons to be learned yet remain.......wonder IF they will be learned???


 No ml has not been expanded over the entire archery season. The point is this "we" you are always refering to.The dept was planning on full expansion reguardless, and they could care less if they divided the sportsman. This "we" you always refer to had about as much clout in this as a gnat on an elephants hind end.:jaw:


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> Yes-many years ago.
> 
> that is no reason to have created a wrongful bigotry towards crossbows.


 They are our regs Jim sorry you do not like them. Its like I told you before a 5 year old can see they are different .


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> They are our regs Jim sorry you do not like them. Its like I told you before a 5 year old can see they are different .



a cowardly and lame answer-the bottom line-there is no difference in performance that can be measured

you all have to base it on how they are shot because the bottom line destroys you

you all want to keep people out and since there is no law that forces people to practice you stick with this

your argument will continue to fail as more and more people understand what really motivates people like you


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> No ml has not been expanded over the entire archery season. The point is this "we" you are always refering to.The dept was planning on full expansion reguardless, and they could care less if they divided the sportsman. This "we" you always refer to had about as much clout in this as a gnat on an elephants hind end.:jaw:


More misinformation from the ms-informed!!!

IF we had NO clout as you suggest why the compromise meetings the Dept had take place???? DID FULL expansion occur or NOT??? Way off yet again.....

So........the ML had a TWO DAY season then another week was added(that would be the Late ML season which btw the UBK fought just as hard and lost even worse on, as always it's THEIR WAY or nothing.....and they continue to lose more ground and membership because of it, as I understand, and I posted ONE for certain who proclaimed it lloudly , proudly and in public)......(check to see exactlyHOW that was done.......to save you some time, *exactly* as this was.......) same for the fall turkey season(s)......sheesh..... POINT being.......nothing "odd" or any different was ever done on this, I however took the "reins" on fighting for expansion compromise for those who felt "cheated" and claimed to not understand or know this was going to take place IOW I listened to the "other side" and and for the sake of UNITY (even though everything WAS in our favor) urged for a fair and just compromise and I don't regret it, and it's easy to NOW see , that would have avoided most(if not all) of this division.....

Sure WE didn't.........that's the whole reason for the KDFWR setting up the Crossbow Advisory Panel, and the Round Table Discussions on the CB.......you are "so off base to make that statement, perhaps Dr. Gassett told you differently than HE did US??? DIdn't think so........

FACT:

*WE* tried to work on this.........it was stated OUR compromise(s) WOULD be accepted and put into place, *THEY *knew this fact and refused .......

Once again no win for the spin!

YOU state you're worried or concerned about Public Land to hunt on ,YET do NOTHING to try to get the funds to aquire it, talk about "odd", when WE are trying to get the P-R funds coming in so that we can try to get them used FOR Public Land aquisition, "odd" isn't it???? For one SOOO concerned with it, to fight the one easy way to help achieve your stated goal.....See? Expansion provides the funding, yet you still oppose it(even after it's passed again) Sorry IF you don't like the facts of the matter but ...

Step one" get the $$$ coming in

Step two work TOGETHER to get that money set aside for Public Land aquisisiton, so far all I've seen are complaints and excuses,while some are actually trying to make things better for everyone.........


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> More misinformation from the ms-informed!!!
> 
> IF we had NO clout as you suggest why the compromise meetings the Dept had take place???? DID FULL expansion occur or NOT??? Way off yet again.....
> 
> So........the ML had a TWO DAY season then another week was added(that would be the Late ML season which btw the UBK fought just as hard and lost even worse on, as always it's THEIR WAY or nothing.....and they continue to lose more ground and membership because of it, as I understand, and I posted ONE for certain who proclaimed it lloudly , proudly and in public)......(check to see exactlyHOW that was done.......to save you some time, *exactly* as this was.......) same for the fall turkey season(s)......sheesh..... POINT being.......nothing "odd" or any different was ever done on this, I however took the "reins" on fighting for expansion compromise for those who felt "cheated" and claimed to not understand or know this was going to take place IOW I listened to the "other side" and and for the sake of UNITY (even though everything WAS in our favor) urged for a fair and just compromise and I don't regret it, and it's easy to NOW see , that would have avoided most(if not all) of this division.....
> 
> Sure WE didn't.........that's the whole reason for the KDFWR setting up the Crossbow Advisory Panel, and the Round Table Discussions on the CB.......you are "so off base to make that statement, perhaps Dr. Gassett told you differently than HE did US??? DIdn't think so........
> 
> FACT:
> 
> *WE* tried to work on this.........it was stated OUR compromise(s) WOULD be accepted and put into place, *THEY *knew this fact and refused .......
> 
> Once again no win for the spin!
> 
> YOU state you're worried or concerned about Public Land to hunt on ,YET do NOTHING to try to get the funds to aquire it, talk about "odd", when WE are trying to get the P-R funds coming in so that we can try to get them used FOR Public Land aquisition, "odd" isn't it???? For one SOOO concerned with it, to fight the one easy way to help achieve your stated goal.....See? Expansion provides the funding, yet you still oppose it(even after it's passed again) Sorry IF you don't like the facts of the matter but ...
> 
> Step one" get the $$$ coming in
> 
> Step two work TOGETHER to get that money set aside for Public Land aquisisiton, so far all I've seen is complaints and excuses,while some are actually trying to make things better for everyone.........


I stated I thought the expansion you have now is fair. I guess you are aware we have some new public land on this end of the state this year


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> a cowardly and lame answer-the bottom line-there is no difference in performance that can be measured
> 
> you all have to base it on how they are shot because the bottom line destroys you
> 
> you all want to keep people out and since there is no law that forces people to practice you stick with this
> 
> your argument will continue to fail as more and more people understand what really motivates people like you


 and as usual your stupid response.
The bottom line is a crossbow has several advantages over a bow , if it did not then why offer a provison for handi capped, why do you crossbow huggers try so hard to defend them when you know they are far easier to use .


----------



## Marvin

KY MUSTANG said:


> and as usual your stupid response.
> The bottom line is a crossbow has several advantages over a bow , if it did not then why offer a provison for handi capped, why do you crossbow huggers try so hard to defend them when you know they are far easier to use .


Because "they" get something from it in the end. Noah's arch had no crossbow on it. There is NO DATA that shows ALL these new hunters to save the day. Just greed to get guns into bow season and watch the bowhunting go down in flames.


----------



## Marvin

spec said:


> Not falling for the "new" hunter idea. The elderly you speak of will not be "new" hunters, perhaps a different weapon. The kids you speak of will have already started with a firearm(without the string) and you are dreaming if anyone thinks the number of new license buyers will be a large number of females.


Exactly, the only thing is will all SOME to do is extend their length of hunting. perfectly fine with everyone and they will most likely qualify for the hanicapped permit regardless. Kids are fine too. great way to get them started. Ace made a lame comment about spreading out more hunters over a longer season. That pretty much says, get the gun guys and easy way in if you ask me. Seems to me you have a lengthy gun season as it is. we only have one week in ohio and it has not helped here either.


----------



## Marvin

KY MUSTANG said:


> and as usual your stupid response.
> The bottom line is a crossbow has several advantages over a bow , if it did not then why offer a provison for handi capped, why do you crossbow huggers try so hard to defend them when you know they are far easier to use .


because they are going to claim game departments are bigoted by BAd information. That evil pope and young club.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Uh........that would be KY HUNTERS who asked the Dept since at least 1999 for MORE time with the crossbow ......a well known fact which I've stated many many times and a few I believe right here in this very thread......point??
> Thats an out right LIE...how many people you got as a memeber of your club? not too many at last count. Lets use the 10 percent rules of memeberships for most clubs. Thats 300 people( being generous of course)...300 people to upset several thousands. I hear a vocal minority echoing in teh background
> 
> WHO asked for compounds to be included......oh Hunters.....imagine that....same exact thing....period.......
> 
> And with the NEW compounds ; since they're allowed NO good reason for ANY of this division on the cb.......much less where it has taken too many good people(who ARE hunters btw).......
> 
> BTW, NON of that IS relevent NOW...the expansion DID in fact occur despite the best attempts at some to thwart it....the process and tactics used however are Important......to many who just may avoid some of OUR problems and mistakes on both sides during this............
> 
> AT least I hope some will at least read these and try to learn from the many facts presented......Where are they slick?
> 
> And it serves no good purpose imho to "spin" the facts and make false claims, what happened IS public record plus WE have the tapes of it all........NO way to dispute any of it with real facts.....Well you better stop then.


Time to put up or shut up on all the truth ace. you have wasted 36 pages of this websites time saying the exact same thing about every third post and have yet to produce anything excpet you have these secret black ops files on everything. No links+ informational website = no FACTS


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NO not that I'm aware of.......
> 
> Which in NO way negates the risks their action have placed on our future soley from their collective actions, and over a "small matter" which should have and could have been easily resolved by working together... which IS a concern even now, and as I've shown WAS then.......did they listen NO.......they involved the Legislature (set a legal precedent on seasons).......NOT "smart" in many's opinion (including a Lawyer who posted numerous times on the Ky forum it was a "very bad idea" among other things........this Lawyer btw has been very active in F&W matters for a very long time.......he was against the expansion and even MORE against these moves.)......that is also a fact easily confirmed btw.......
> 
> SO NO.....not that I'm aware of....doesnt' make it "right" nor "wise" or "prudent" now does it??


What risk did they take ace? when you get ram rodded what do you expect?
lets examine what went down

1) VERY questionable survey went out to a sole source company with a history for crossbow support( cornell) using public money better spent by an instate institution.
2) season QUICKLY expands from handicapped permit to Full season without hunter input or regard
3) bowhunters do what they can to question the survey because it is WAY to fishy and they smell setup. 
4) UCBK somehow gets an incomplete list of their memeber out showing 55% are out of staters. which is your own fault anyway
5) the UCBK were not invited for the compromise meeting( seeing as you would not of had a vote without the nonresidents and canadians).

3)


----------



## cynic

Hi there Marvin, How has everything been?
*"why do you crossbow huggers try so hard to defend them when you know they are far easier to use ."*
Can we substitue the word compound for xbow in regards to bows? I feel that not only is this horse dead but crippled..


----------



## Marvin

cynic said:


> Hi there Marvin, How has everything been?
> *"why do you crossbow huggers try so hard to defend them when you know they are far easier to use ."*
> Can we substitue the word compound for xbow in regards to bows? I feel that not only is this horse dead but crippled..


been fine cynic. how about yourself? You ned to come up here and take this florida humidity back with you. it sucks here. :tongue:


----------



## thesource

cynic said:


> Can we substitue the word compound for xbow in regards to bows? I feel that not only is this horse dead but crippled..


You _could_, I suppose ......

But it would be misleading since a crossbow and a compound are obviously not the same.

Oh yea - that is the point of your comment - to mislead. Carry on.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> and as usual your stupid response.
> The bottom line is a crossbow has several advantages over a bow , if it did not then why offer a provison for handi capped, why do you crossbow huggers try so hard to defend them when you know they are far easier to use .


ignorant people worry about "ease of use" because they want to keep people out of the season based on perceived time cost of bowhunting proficiency. Ease of use has nothing to do with effectiveness. the bottom line is that a crossbow offers no range, accuracy or trajectory advantage over a compound bow-its just a bit easier to learn


you don't like that because it allows people to hunt say a week or two earlier
time cost of learning the shooting part of bowhunting is not something game managers or members of the public really care about. Only snobs who think that they are more elite

Yet you compound types never admit that a compound is a huge huge jump in ease of learning over a trad bow and yet that was ok but a few less hours or days with an xbow is awful

its hypocrisy-you want to do it "easy" but you don't want anyone else to do it slightly easier because you are greedy and selfish

Why can't you all be honest and just admit what motivates you rather than spew this dishonest crap about OH THEY ARE UNFAIR. No they are not and if you don't like practicing, you shouldn't be on an archery forum

BTW I shoot my crossbow more than 99% of the bowhunters in the USA and I compete in high pressure tournaments (3D and Target) as well
now tell me -ASSUMING YOU HAVE LEARNED HOW TO SHOOT A COMPOUND proficiently-how are you disadvantaged by someone using a crossbow? THE ONLY ANSWER IS you can claim you had to practice a bit more. SO WHAT? don't you like to shoot? I was shooting 30,000 arrows a year at one time. I wish my body could allow me to do that still.


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> You _could_, I suppose ......
> 
> But it would be misleading since a crossbow and a compound are obviously not the same.
> 
> Oh yea - that is the point of your comment - to mislead. Carry on.


You could put gun in there too. Tank, SAM, Butter knife, Tire iron, Wood stick, Leopard, gernade etc...


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You _could_, I suppose ......
> 
> But it would be misleading since a crossbow and a compound are obviously not the same.
> 
> Oh yea - that is the point of your comment - to mislead. Carry on.



but shooting a compound and a crossbow are far closer =both in learning curves and mechanics and aiming-then shooting a bare recurve bow

real archers know that


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> because they are going to claim game departments are bigoted by BAd information. That evil pope and young club.



you are actually correct here Marvin. in states where there is no xbow hunting the only organized efforts come from the bigots against xbows and they flood DNR's with the crap Free Range dribbles from the PBS Cesspool


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> you are actually correct here Marvin. in states where there is no xbow hunting the only organized efforts come from the bigots against xbows and they flood DNR's with the crap Free Range dribbles from the PBS Cesspool


 good morning Jim
I don't believe you but there nothing new there. The only thing I can think of is them writing a letter to game departments saying xbows have no place in bow season. If you have others, id like to see them
I believe the crossbow issue was challenged this past year in Montana and Alaska. The judge ruled Against the xbow because he said that the issue was not limiting the hunters ability to hunt(gun season). Thats going to be popping up more and more because it is the truth. Oh and good morning Jim. Of course they do not have over population issues either that the east of the mississippi states do.


----------



## cynic

Jim C said:


> but shooting a compound and a crossbow are far closer =both in learning curves and mechanics and aiming-then shooting a bare recurve bow
> 
> real archers know that


Jim they never claimed to be real archers, only that they shoot a bow.


----------



## Jim C

cynic said:


> Jim they never claimed to be real archers, only that they shoot a bow.



we have seen lots of claims but yes, there is a difference between bowhunters and archers. At one time there really wasn't. compounds and crossbows changed that. its neither good nor bad


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Exactly, the only thing is will all SOME to do is extend their length of hunting.
> 
> See now that's foolish to even state, especially given the DATA from other states which proves MORE women, youth and Senior hunters will pariticiapte if given the OPPORUNITY to use the cb...Using Tenn for expample,(even source has NO doubt read the posts on that forum by for example Worm's finace` about how she couldn't shoot a bow but was happy to be able to hunt with the cb and had in fact killed several deer....
> 
> Sorry, you lose on this one without doubt or question, I don't know maybe it's not that way in Ohio, but down this way, women, youth and senior hunters ARE embracing the concept, that's good for all....
> 
> 
> perfectly fine with everyone and they will most likely qualify for the hanicapped permit regardless. Kids are fine too. great way to get them started.
> 
> MANY women and kids do NOT like the muzzle blast and recoil of guns, that's no secret they do like shooting crossbows and will when allowed during weather they don't mind.......nice "reach" ..."no cigar"
> 
> 
> Ace made a lame comment about spreading out more hunters over a longer season. That pretty much says, get the gun guys and easy way in if you ask me.
> 
> Didn't ask you and don't care what it says to you......it means the LONGER anyone has to hunt the less pressure they'll put on their area, anyone who actually hunts can understand that simple fact, IF you have a say two week gun season there would be less pressure than a one week one, consequently IF they have 65 days to use their crossbow rather than 10 they'll NOT all hunt the same days, thus making it "better" for all involved, increase the days allowed to hunt, you decrease the pressure on any given day.......it's NOT hard to understand, IF one has an open mind and really thinks about what I'm saying.....more days to hunt means fewer out on each day (since they don't have to hurry up before season ends, hunters have less pressure on them and so does the game..
> 
> 
> Seems to me you have a lengthy gun season as it is. we only have one week in ohio and it has not helped here either.


Depends on which Zone you're in , also in Zone 4 Counties modern gun hunters can NOT take doe, ONLY archery OR Late ML can they take a doe, these are also by far the poor counties economically, which tells me they could use the meat, cb allow them to harvest a doe during the expanded cb season.......that's good for the hunter and the herd there........and will likely help many familie's budgets, something I care about btw

It's not so simple as yes or no, with our Zone structure, (which I think is a "good thing" overall) what some can easily do others can't (based upon deer numbers......again good, but IF you really need the additional meat and can't shoot a bow, or work two jobs and don't have time to practice enough to feel confident in hunting with a bow, the cb just might put some much needed meat in your freezer especially true in a Zone 4 County.....


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> MANY women and kids do NOT like the muzzle blast and recoil of guns, that's no secret they do like shooting crossbows and will when allowed during weather they don't mind.......nice "reach" ..."no cigar"


That's what HE said ..... duh. 

He said crossbows would be fine for women and youths. 

Geez. Learn to read!


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> What risk did they take ace?
> 
> Only the future of HOW our game and fish laws are made, which does in fact open the "peta" door, AND your "pandora's box; which many of us have worked long and hard to keep shut....as usual you don't understand Ky regs and statutes nor the LKS, but what you accused the UCBK of doing the anti expansion crowd has actually done, it's NO secret, they knew when they were doing it and went right ahead, and over this non-issue no less.......I equate it to using a nuke on a rat, many agreed and we are all waiting for the "fallout" which is now inevitable, NO matter how you (or anyone) feels about me or the expansion those tactics were and are dangerous and effect/affect every single person who hunts or fishes in Ky......that is ALL they risked Marvin thanks for asking
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> when you get ram rodded what do you expect?Well, first no one was "ram rodded", working something in over a 5 year period because the Hunters of YOUR state asked for it certainly doesn't qualify.....Secondly I expect them to play by the rules already set NOT rewrite laws (or try to do so) and settting of legal precedeints is foolish and short sighted, again even a Lawyer against the expansion agreed with me on a public forum on this fact...
> 
> 
> lets examine what went down
> 
> Yes LET'S DO:
> 
> 1) VERY questionable survey went out to a sole source company with a history for crossbow support( cornell) using public money better spent by an instate institution.
> 
> Once again NOTHING "questionalbe" at all about the survey, those who dispute it on the one hand say the number surveyed was too small (and it's proven to be accurate by the way it was done AND because the random samples were pretty much equal accross the NINE districts) but while they say the sample was too small they think the KDFWR should ONLY listen to two bow clubs who's COMBINED membership is NOT even 20% of the (they say) 2% surveyed...........SO to assume the survey IS flawed and to do what those saying it shouldn't be counted , would be to listen to less than 20% of the 2% (again using their figures).....ANYONE who thinks that less than 20% of the "too small" 2% makes sense needs to really examine some facts and seek help, NOTHING leading or misleading on the survey, it's in fact posted on the net for all to see and examine, NOTHING has ever been PROVEN for that stance, untill it IS PROVEN, it STANDS ......period, easy for you to try to dispute it your state DNR didn't spend $70,000+ WE did, and IF you understood KY politics you'd KNOW why it was NOT done "in State".....Heck the State Senator Ballard got to draft SB 211 is on Murray State University's Payroll!!! (hope that helps to explain somewhat why WE in Ky didn't want it done "in state" (and btw that was the stance of both sides of the issue IIRC)
> 
> 
> 2) season QUICKLY expands from handicapped permit to Full season without hunter input or regard
> Quickly......let's see this took place for well over 5 years, I'd hardly call that quickly, the turkey season expansions certainly were much quicker as was adding the Late ML season ......sorry "no sale"
> 
> 
> 3) bowhunters do what they can to question the survey because it is WAY to fishy and they smell setup.
> 
> NO proof, *unfounded* claims unproven allegations, and NO one even thinks in reality that Cornell would risk their very fine reputation, (they do the US Census for crying out loud) over a KY crossbow survey......NO proof ever and NOT from lack of trying.........the survey stands....as it should the KDFWR stands behind it, as do most of Ky's hunters.....
> 
> To "simplify it" for the "slow"......WE in Ky have over 90% who ARE Gun hunters to assume, hope or otherwise expect them to care about what weapon is legal during archery season is absurd, THAT fact alone proves the merits of the survey.......TWO same results TEN same results Gun hunters do NOT care what is or isn't legal archery weaponry.......and any one who actually thinks about that FACT can understand why there is NOT a majority AGAINST expansion........MOST gun hunters you ask will tell you "IF archery hunters want to use a cb fine by me, won't affect me one way or the other"........IF anyone can't see that FACT then the lessons can't be learned, you MUST know your state's makeup to accept or reject such data, when you KNOW that more than 90% gun hunt hoping against hope is futile at best.........YOU may not like it (or Ballard or..) but that IS how it "is"
> 
> 
> 
> 4) UCBK somehow gets an incomplete list of their memeber out showing 55% are out of staters. which is your own fault anyway
> 100 % NOT relevent
> 
> 
> 5) the UCBK were not invited for the compromise meeting( seeing as you would not of had a vote without the nonresidents and canadians).
> 
> YOU have NO clue of what you're saying WE(UCBK) DID have our two votes at the LKS convention........the two are NOT related, WE(UCBK) were likely NOT invited because they already had to give MORE than they EVER wanted to (forced by the very Legislature they ran to......guess there IS SOME justice after all for those who do the "right thing") thus having any of us there(especially JD Miller) I'd say they feared we'd get even MORE.............THAT is the reason........because in the first place when this "meeting " DID take place we had 95% KY MEMBERSHIP......a FACT you seem to love to "forget"......at any rate this point is 100% wrong on your part........you'll have to at least get which is which (the LKS and this thing) before I can help you understand better IF you don't even know OUR membership was Ky resident by a vast majoirty thus could NOT have been an issue hard to go from there.....
> 
> 
> 3)





Hope you better undertand your "points" aren't really......have a great weekend!:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> You _could_, I suppose ......
> 
> But it would be misleading since a crossbow and a compound are obviously not the same.
> 
> Oh yea - that is the point of your comment - to mislead. Carry on.


AND there is MUCH more difference in a longbow and compound they are NOT the same either.....

Same is true of the recurve; longbow; and the compound, NOT the same obviously....:cocktail: 

But they are all archery weapons just as the cb IF they're allowed no good reason for not allowing the other one......simple really "the same" would eliminate ALL but ONE of the weapons.......I can live with that.......IF that's really what is wanted........I would "guess" however most would NOT give up thier compounds to appease you ........betcha I'm not wrong either and that is true in ANY state.......imho

NO point made there, at least that I can see.....:darkbeer: 

I'll ask again to please stick to the legislation topic......and maybe we can keep this thread alive, Marvin assumes I've "wasted" space, others seem to enjoy reading about what has taken place, and I think are learning from this,so when it comes to their state(s), they'll be far better equipped to work it out together without all the costly mistakes WE have made in KY.....again that IS the sole purpose of this thread NOT whether or not the cb belongs, that was a YES vote twice........in KY


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Because "they" get something from it in the end. Noah's arch had no crossbow on it.
> 
> NO compounds either ....
> 
> 
> There is NO DATA that shows ALL these new hunters to save the day. Just greed to get guns into bow season and watch the bowhunting go down in flames.


NOT true, the first year in Tennesee, even the anti crowd admitted to MANY more women and youth AND senoir hunters being "out there" , they also noted it did NOT affect/effect them at all, even though they also admitted they thought that it would, also IF you'd bother to visit Archery Shops in states that just expanded and spend some time talking to them, you'd KNOW how wrong that statement IS..........

Funny thing is; first you guys talk about Overcrowding, THEN turn right around and say there will be NO new hunters..........pick ONE and stick with it please...........sheesh

Problem for your side, is the fact that more hunters are spread out over a longer season which allows for most to NOT hunt the same exact time(some mornings some evenenings etc. some Monday some Thursday etc.etc. ) It's a "win-win" and only the close minded refuse to see the "win-win" and the NEW hunters since they're NOT "everywhere" all of the time........Tenn had a HUGE increase in tags sold......wonder how that occured...........so did VA IIRC.......hmmm NO new hunters.........NO data..........NO truth to that.......

Besides IF WE provide the oppotunity, that's really all we can do, and work toward recruiting more hunters (badly needed period) both for "political clout" and the "numbers game" that ALL politicians look at.......small groups (like bowhunting is now becoming) are "easy targets" ........larger groups......are NOT.........try to dispute that fact........might be intersting.......


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Ace I am going to ask you for the 3rd time....... who got the shake out racoon season stopped in Ky, how did they do it? You are dodging this question no doubt:zip:


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> WE(UCBK) were likely NOT invited because they already had to give MORE than they EVER wanted to (forced by the very Legislature they ran to......guess there IS SOME justice after all for those who do the "right thing") thus having any of us there(especially JD Miller)


Ace - I'm not gonna be back on here this weekend, but this statement is an absolute FALSEHOOD, and it's clear that you're really talking out of your ass now. 

If somebody told you that, either (a) they flat-out lied to you; or (b) they don't know what they're talking about. If that's the case, please disclose your source, so I can lambaste them. 

On the other hand, it's entirely possible (and in fact likely) that you just made it up yourself.

If that's the case, you're a fool for making up nonsense for the sole purpose of creating enemies and escalating the antagonism. This deal was struck to give the xbowers some expansion in an effort to overcome the rift that the issue had caused, not b/c anybody was afraid to run the table with SB 211. 

Your suggestion that this compromise was forced on our side is really annoying. First, you ***** about the compromise season date and then that UCBK wasn't invited. Now, you pull a 180 degree turn and say that the Senators forced this compromise on us to avoid taking SB 211 to a vote???


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> No ml has not been expanded over the entire archery season. The point is this "we" you are always refering to.
> 
> The dept was planning on full expansion reguardless, and they could care less if they divided the sportsman. This "we" you always refer to had about as much clout in this as a gnat on an elephants hind end.:jaw:


Let's examine both the validity of these statements and also the "clout" issues shall we??

YOU state the Dept was for full expansion while true a bit misleading because on the FIRST vote (when expansion was passed then taken away, doing much financial damage to many small archery shops no less.......but what the hay.......I guess).......THAT vote was ONLY 5-4........

Then it had to be "done over", so NOW you guys should have it "made in the shade" because in reality all you need do is sway ONE commioner's vote "your way" , and WE lose.....

But that didn't happen............in fact you guys LOST all four votes you once had...........could it be the tactics used "greatly upset" those who were once on your side........I'd guess yes (and it may not be a guess at all........like Ballard I don't post nearly all I know on these matters......)

As for the "clout" issue, think about US......few of us were "new" to working with the KDFWR, most had years of experience and are well known by the commioners and Dr. Gassett........also WE were "on their side" NOT against them, nor their every move as was your side......even trying to impose term limits no less........."wise moves".......we'll let "history" decide.......:cocktail: :darkbeer: 

The KDFWR DID in fact set up meetings to TRY to reach a compromise, I know Tom C . was told IF we could "work something out together" it would become the season ............the "other side" refused every attempt (some much less than what we ended up with btw) their stance was "NO commpromise" "YOU'LL GET NOTHING EVER".....etc.etc.etc. 

Why? They bet on the survey (knowing the 90%+ gun hunter rate because I proved it to them as Tom C. backed it up with Dept figures as well.......) Bet big........lose big.........imagine that......

So in the beginning the Dept majority WAS for full expansion, only one vote could have changed that however, not only did you guys NOT get that one vote..........you lost the four you once had........

I submit the tactics used.........were to blame........

thus most (if not all clout) went "our way".....any way you "slice" it.......it's a matter of public record ; very easy to check.....btw....

BTW I still have my tooth.......:wink:


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Ace - I'm not gonna be back on here this weekend, but this statement is an absolute FALSEHOOD, and it's clear that you're really talking out of your ass now.
> 
> Not even close,
> 
> If somebody told you that, either (a) they flat-out lied to you; or (b) they don't know what they're talking about. If that's the case, please disclose your source, so I can lambaste them.
> 
> On the other hand, it's entirely possible (and in fact likely) that you just made it up yourself.
> 
> Whatever Ballard........I would have hoped by now you knew me better than that , but then again imho judgemenets aren't your strong suit anyway
> 
> If that's the case, you're a fool for making up nonsense for the sole purpose of creating enemies and escalating the antagonism. This deal was struck to give the xbowers some expansion in an effort to overcome the rift that the issue had caused, not b/c anybody was afraid to run the table with SB 211.
> 
> HOw much sense does that point make?? SB 211 WAS already on the table........had NOT been up for a vote though, time was running out; and it still had the House .......and then the Gov to sign it whcih btw WE were told he would NOT do....(THE HOUSE'S own bill you talked about was 180 opposite, "urging the KDFWR to go forward with the expansion" thus giving us reason to doubt it's passage there......among other things......whcih I won't disclose, just like you I don't post nearly all I know ....
> 
> VERY FAR from the "done deal" you keep hoping anyone wiill believe as you claim, most know the obstacles it was facing again time being on our side........
> 
> YOU already had RUN to the table with SB 211......you admited that, and seem proud of it....saying in fact you'd do it again....good for you I guess, YOU have always known my stance on it......never changed never will........I feel it was stupid and dangerous and over this again like using a nuke on a rat......obviously the many risks seemed worth it to you even after Sky was concerned.......your call......and YOU get to live with whatever comes down the road because of it, NO one will forget it bet on it.....
> 
> Your suggestion that this compromise was forced on our side is really annoying. First, you ***** about the compromise season date and then that UCBK wasn't invited. Now, you pull a 180 degree turn and say that the *Senators forced this compromise on us to avoid taking SB 211 to a vote???[/*QUOTE]
> 
> OH then I guess when it was always stated we'd get nothing and sb 211's sole purpose was to insure just that, suddenly everyone involved just decided to "play nice"..........hmm why is that SO very hard to believe, especially since YOU stated the main reason for NOT wanting to compromise was Baker's "threat"???????????? Since that didn't change.......sorry "no sale", Dr. Gassett made it clear it was NOT his meeting, the Legislature asked him to compromise and NOT involve them in this........thus it stands to reason they told your side the same thing (and since you were NOT there, I'll take what was said about the meeting as fact unless proven otherwise)
> 
> YOU know for a fact I never was very concerned about sb211 actually making it into law,(MY concern was it ever being drafted in the first place which I stand by 100%)
> 
> I've explained the reason(s) for this , number one on the list is TIME was running out for it, thus on OUR side.........you can dispute that IF you wish.....since I have good information from Legislators who explained OTHER bills could NOT be addressed because of "time constraints" and they were tied up with the budget issue bills............now IF you'd like to prove that false.........be my guest.....I'm sure they'd love to see you say that much less in print...
> 
> I said that it was forced on the DEPT..........where DO you get this stuff from??? IT was and in fact was used as leverage against Dr. Gassett for other pending Legislation ........Even Tom C. posted that Dr. Gassett told him that, YOU didn't deny it then (again) why do you think you can with me, when you know I watched for your response ( I like the entertainment mainly)........
> 
> I also notice you have yet to answer my question on working together on future issues??? Why?
> 
> Have a great weekend, we'll likely never agree on these points, I have no problem with that, or with you........I'm thinking that is not mutual, however???


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> Ace - I'm not gonna be back on here this weekend, but this statement is an absolute FALSEHOOD, and it's clear that you're really talking out of your ass now.
> 
> If somebody told you that, either (a) they flat-out lied to you; or (b) they don't know what they're talking about. If that's the case, please disclose your source, so I can lambaste them.
> 
> On the other hand, it's entirely possible (and in fact likely) that you just made it up yourself.
> 
> If that's the case, you're a fool for making up nonsense for the sole purpose of creating enemies and escalating the antagonism. This deal was struck to give the xbowers some expansion in an effort to overcome the rift that the issue had caused, not b/c anybody was afraid to run the table with SB 211.
> 
> Your suggestion that this compromise was forced on our side is really annoying. First, you ***** about the compromise season date and then that UCBK wasn't invited. Now, you pull a 180 degree turn and say that the Senators forced this compromise on us to avoid taking SB 211 to a vote???


Looks like the Liar tag just got put on ole ace once again. looks like the nut house is one short..they gotta tighten up security there


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Depends on which Zone you're in , also in Zone 4 Counties modern gun hunters can NOT take doe, ONLY archery OR Late ML can they take a doe, these are also by far the poor counties economically, which tells me they could use the meat, cb allow them to harvest a doe during the expanded cb season.......that's good for the hunter and the herd there........and will likely help many familie's budgets, something I care about btw
> 
> It's not so simple as yes or no, with our Zone structure, (which I think is a "good thing" overall) what some can easily do others can't (based upon deer numbers......again good, but IF you really need the additional meat and can't shoot a bow, or work two jobs and don't have time to practice enough to feel confident in hunting with a bow, the cb just might put some much needed meat in your freezer especially true in a Zone 4 County.....


Okay one state out of how many ace? do they have published and verified stats on that or was that your modest and unbiased "survey". Yeah one state out of how many? theres that majority once again.


----------



## Marvin

I have been reading som earticles about Dr Gasset and i noticed one trend.....He is getting yelled at an by the state legislature. so i find it hard to believe that the state legislature forced them to find a compromise.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> ballard said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ace - I'm not gonna be back on here this weekend, but this statement is an absolute FALSEHOOD, and it's clear that you're really talking out of your ass now.
> 
> Not even close,
> Then prove him wrong. its your word against his. Proof time
> If somebody told you that, either (a) they flat-out lied to you; or (b) they don't know what they're talking about. If that's the case, please disclose your source, so I can lambaste them.
> 
> On the other hand, it's entirely possible (and in fact likely) that you just made it up yourself.
> Or your just made a bunch of lies in your head. its a two way street
> 
> Whatever Ballard........I would have hoped by now you knew me better than that , but then again imho judgemenets aren't your strong suit anyway
> Which one of you. there two of you that i can see. the bitter side and the soap box side.
> If that's the case, you're a fool for making up nonsense for the sole purpose of creating enemies and escalating the antagonism. This deal was struck to give the xbowers some expansion in an effort to overcome the rift that the issue had caused, not b/c anybody was afraid to run the table with SB 211.
> 
> HOw much sense does that point make?? SB 211 WAS already on the table........had NOT been up for a vote though, time was running out; and it still had the House .......and then the Gov to sign it whcih btw WE were told he would NOT do....(THE HOUSE'S own bill you talked about was 180 opposite, "urging the KDFWR to go forward with the expansion" thus giving us reason to doubt it's passage there......among other things......whcih I won't disclose, just like you I don't post nearly all I know ....
> 
> VERY FAR from the "done deal" you keep hoping anyone wiill believe as you claim, most know the obstacles it was facing again time being on our side........
> 
> YOU already had RUN to the table with SB 211......you admited that, and seem proud of it....saying in fact you'd do it again....good for you I guess, YOU have always known my stance on it......never changed never will........I feel it was stupid and dangerous and over this again like using a nuke on a rat......obviously the many risks seemed worth it to you even after Sky was concerned.......your call......and YOU get to live with whatever comes down the road because of it, NO one will forget it bet on it.....
> What did the bill say ? try not to lie about it as hard as it may seem.
> Your suggestion that this compromise was forced on our side is really annoying. First, you ***** about the compromise season date and then that UCBK wasn't invited. Now, you pull a 180 degree turn and say that the *Senators forced this compromise on us to avoid taking SB 211 to a vote???[/*QUOTE]
> 
> PLEASE show me where I ever said that.........YOU know for a fact I never was very concerned about sb211 actually making it into law, I've explained the reason(s) for this , number one on the list is TIME was running out for it, thus on OUR side.........you can dispute that IF you wish.....since I have good information from Legislators who explained OTHER bills could NOT be addressed because of "time constraints" and they were tied up with the budget issue bills............now IF you'd like to prove that false.........be my guest.....I'm sure they'd love to see you say that much less in print...
> 
> I said that it was forced on the DEPT..........where DO you get this stuff from??? IT was and in fact was used as leverage against Dr. Gassett for other pending Legislation ........Even Tom C. posted that Dr. Gassett told him that, YOU didn't deny it then (again) why do you think you can with me, when you know I watched for your response ( I like the entertainment mainly)........
> Heresay not admissable
> I also notice you have yet to answer my question on working together on future issues??? Why?
> Because he cannot respect ou like many others. I could not stop laughing if you were sitting across the table from me.
> 
> Have a great weekend, we'll likely never agree on these points, I have no problem with that, or with you........I'm thinking that is not mutual, however???
Click to expand...


----------



## Marvin

ace you said this

Sorry, you lose on this one without doubt or question, I don't know maybe it's not that way in Ohio, but down this way, women, youth and senior hunters ARE embracing the concept, that's good for all....



Duh no crapola. so are teh people to lazy to pick up a bow who will be the majority of users. Women children and seniors could have been given the bypass on this and nobody would have cared a bit. Yet you hide behind them like a muslim extremist using them as a shield for cause. Classic example of bombing a red cross medical building. Why not focus your efforts on NASP? Thats too easy...what do you get out of this? Nobody takes this kind of beating for nothing. Not even you.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NOT true, the first year in Tennesee, even the anti crowd admitted to MANY more women and youth AND senoir hunters being "out there" , they also noted it did NOT affect/effect them at all, even though they also admitted they thought that it would, also IF you'd bother to visit Archery Shops in states that just expanded and spend some time talking to them, you'd KNOW how wrong that statement IS..........
> 
> Funny thing is; first you guys talk about Overcrowding, THEN turn right around and say there will be NO new hunters..........pick ONE and stick with it please...........sheesh
> actually there will be No "NEW" hunters. just gun hunters who could already join teh bow season but not take the 4 hours to shoot a compound.
> Problem for your side, is the fact that more hunters are spread out over a longer season which allows for most to NOT hunt the same exact time(some mornings some evenenings etc. some Monday some Thursday etc.etc. ) It's a "win-win" and only the close minded refuse to see the "win-win" and the NEW hunters since they're NOT "everywhere" all of the time........Tenn had a HUGE increase in tags sold......wonder how that occured...........so did VA IIRC.......hmmm NO new hunters.........NO data..........NO truth to that.......
> HUGE ? how big a percent? Wanna bet on a trend ace?
> Besides IF WE provide the oppotunity, that's really all we can do, and work toward recruiting more hunters (badly needed period) both for "political clout" and the "numbers game" that ALL politicians look at.......small groups (like bowhunting is now becoming) are "easy targets" ........larger groups......are NOT.........try to dispute that fact........might be intersting.......


Political clout my rearend. You show me a staggering gain in hunters( not just bow hunters) its just a switch over from gun to gunlike bow. Your memebership should be expanding by leaps and bounds too right?


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Looks like the Liar tag just got put on ole ace once again. looks like the nut house is one short..they gotta tighten up security there


NOT even close.........his percetption and mine (and many others fwiw) differ that's all.......with his NOT being present, we're both going on "second hand information" at best........but no one beleives this was a "good faith" "play nice" deal..........they had too many chances for too long for anyone to even begin to think suddenly they changed their collective minds......(see the quote from LoweBow for the why we don't buy it)........so suddenly

Also Ballard would love everyone to beleive sb211 was a "done deal" when in fact it was a "longshot" to ever make it out of the House on time(IF it had gotten out of the Senate even)......and anyone knows when ONE Senate Bill conflicts 100% with their own House bill (sb 211 vs HCR 13......the ONE I posted that Ballard was upset about) it's far , far from "over " or passiing so easily if at all.......

But the real fact of the matter is; WE ALL (both sides0 were working on getting the KLEPF passed (this would have paid for the required continuing education of Ky's Conservation Officers that NOW have to pay that out of their pockets, while ALL other law enforment gets these very funds) Long story short , it NEVER came to a vote.........why??? Time constraints is what I was told by one of the Heads of the commitee sponsoring it...........IF that "good" bill couldn't get passed it's impossilbe to ever convince ME, that a crossbow season bill (which is and was already the responsibiltiy of the KDFWR anyway, and they KNOW this then and now......) IOW they didn't have this anywhere NEAR "the top of the heap" as many of us were told exactly that........

Again, Liar is a very strong word , not needed and helps NO one (on either side)........fact is, I will always believe IF they thought they could have gotten it passed they'd "stuck to their guns" JUST as they had for nearly 18 months, the FACT they didn't tells most (on both sides) some hate to admit that.........so the best they have is, we finally decided to be nice........which they could have done more than a YEAR ago , and avoided ALL of this.....

So the REAL question is: IF what is stated is so true.......(which is in serious doubt btw) WHY wasn't it done much sooner, when it would have kept the divisions and "infighting" down.........but then suddenly done in ONE day.......after months of "compromise talks" where every single time, every single offer was a very strong NO WAY........

Ballard himself, stated they wouldn't compromise because of ONE commision member saying use the compromise to ram it down their throats in 2006........anyone remember that???

Guess what, that didn't change............so on the one hand the stance is NO....forever........on the other hand it's OK let's all get along NOW.....

...anyone who buys that without much though is wishful thinking........

WE dealt with them enough to have little doubt they'd ONLY give us anything when that was their ONLY option........and for all we know, sb 211 could have been slated to be withdrawn anyway, perhaps due to time constraints,(pure speculation on my part )..... whatever the reason...........you can bet they only gave us some expansion because they KNEW they were out of options, otherwise WE could have worked together much, much earlier as our side tried in vain for a YEAR........

Now ......really think about it.........who's perception makes the most sense on this???:cocktail: :darkbeer:


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NOT even close.........his percetption and mine (and many others fwiw) differ that's all.......with his NOT being present, we're both going on "second hand information" at best........but no one beleives this was a "good faith" "play nice" deal..........they had too many chances for too long for anyone to even begin to think suddenly they changed their collective minds......(see the quote from LoweBow for the why we don't buy it)........so suddenly
> Agreed then if its all second hand. i suggest you shut up about it then. I makes me wonder how much more info you have that is second hand now. Also Ballard would love everyone to beleive sb211 was a "done deal" when in fact it was a "longshot" to ever make it out of the House on time......and anyone knows when ONE Senate Bill conflicts 100% with their own House bill (sb 211 vs HCR 13......the ONE I posted that Ballard was upset about) it's far , far from "over " or passiing so easily if at all.......
> dodging questions again ace...what did it do? you must have nothing to do if you are sitting in session with these guys( which i highly doubt)But the real fact of the matter is; WE ALL (both sides0 were working on getting the KLEPF passed (this would have paid for the required continuing education of Ky's Conservation Officers that NOW have to pay that out of their pockets, while ALL other law enforment gets these very funds) Long story short , it NEVER came to a vote.........why??? Time constraints is what I was told by one of the Heads of the commitee sponsoring it...........IF that "good" bill couldn't get passed it's impossilbe to ever convince ME, that a crossbow season bill (which is and was already the responsibiltiy of the KDFWR anyway, and they KNOW this then and now......) IOW they didn't have this anywhere NEAR "the top of the heap" as many of us were told exactly that........
> This is what all teh stink was about? Paying for law enforcements officers education? wowAgain, Liar is a very strong word ( but truthful) , not needed and helps NO one (on either side)........fact is, I will always believe IF they thought they could have gotten it passed they'd "stuck to their guns" JUST as they had for nearly 18 months, the FACT they didn't tells most (on both sides) some hate to admit that.........so the best they have is, we finally decided to be nice........which they could have done more than a YEAR ago , and avoided ALL of this.....
> 
> So the REAL question is: IF what is stated is so true.......(which is in serious doubt btw) WHY wasn't it done much sooner, when it would have kept the divisions and "infighting" down.........but then suddenly done in ONE day.......after months of "compromise talks" where every single time, every single offer was a very strong NO WAY........
> stay on track here. not sur what your saying too many generalities
> Ballard himself, stated they wouldn't compromise because of ONE commision member saying use the compromise to ram it down their throats in 2006........anyone remember that??? no
> 
> Guess what, that didn't change............so on the one hand the stance is NO....forever........on the other hand it's OK let's all get along NOW.....
> 
> ...anyone who buys that without much though is wishful thinking........
> 
> WE dealt with them enough to have little doubt they'd ONLY give us anything when that was their ONLY option........and for all we know, sb 211 could have been slated to be withdrawn anyway, perhaps due to time constraints,(pure speculation on my part )..... whatever the reason...........you can bet they only gave us some expansion because they KNEW they were out of options, otherwise WE could have worked together much, much earlier as our side tried in vain for a YEAR........Lots of speculation again here ace. your bitter but want to work together right?
> 
> Now ......really think about it.........who's perception makes the most sense on this???:cocktail: :darkbeer:


Your perception is a bit warped. That chip is showing again.


----------



## Marvin

Please oh please tell us about teh raccon season ace? Inquiring minds want to know. it seems to be linked to all this crossbow madness.


----------



## aceoky

ballard
He also wants to argue that support for SB 211 (which would have maintained the existing xbow season) was based on "misinformation" and "lies".
A well known fact which was never retracted either on the show or anywhere else PRIOR to sb 211 being withdrawn.....and we all know it AND ONLY IF SB 211 PASSED it didn't it was withdrawn said:


> that was incorrect[/B].
> 
> Yeah take his word, I have NEVER appeared on a radio talk show spewing forth misinformation to garner support for a bill I went behind other's backs to have drafted.......he had over a month to realize this was not true, didn't and NEVER went back on and retracted the false statements made about the KDFWR nor the REGs being filed WAY before the deadline.....WE all know this fact......thus calling ME a liar based upon his conjecture is more than hilarious.......
> 
> ALSO they WERE filed for more than a month before that show aired, shall I show everyone here how YOU got so many to tune in something Like "want to hear the truth about how the KDFWR is SELLING OUT your resources to the crossbow industry" which was IN FACT an entire show soley devoted to sb 211 and why everyone should call and voice support for it.............do you honestly think anyone's memory is that bad .....hmmmm
> 
> 
> Ace's claim, however, that SB 211's support was based on this incorrect assumption is absurd.
> 
> Be honest here Ballard, why else would you guys devote an ENTIRE show to ask for support for sb 211? So they'd call and write their legislarors on a budget issue??
> 
> What he leaves out though is that KDFWR (or someone who supported xbows) had enlisted a diff't state legislator to* introduce a bill that would've put the legislator's stamp of imprimatur on the expanded xbow season. *
> 
> THAT would be HCR 13, the one I posted in full, which also proves that sb 211 was FAR from a "done deal", the House had spoken in favor of the expanded crossbow season, some didn't like that, made a "fuss about it" yet actually expect the House to just "go with a 100% opposite bill from what they'd already endorsed.......hard to imagine many falling for that line......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Although this bill has little chance of passing,
> 
> Sure it had "little chance" wonder why it was "reported favorably" then??? Yet you'd like everyone to believe that sb 211 was a "sure thing" sorry most don't buy that......not news either btw
> 
> 
> 
> the intended purpose was to send a message to the LRC that the legislature supported the expanded xbow season (which would have, for all practical purposes, stopped the LRC from even thinking about sending the expanded season regs back).
> 
> Don't see your point here, you KNOW WE didn't have anything to do with it, plus had YOU guys worked together with us, it would have never even happened, it makes one wonder IF that could have been the cause of it being drafted???? After all you guys lost the four votes you once had, made some people "angry" .......not hard to imagine that could "backfire" now is it??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll stand by everything else.


Bully for you!!:cocktail:


----------



## Marvin

*Searching through the catacombs- ACE*

AS for the KY regs.........they WERE changed(by amendment,(*something NOT allowed to be done on a Ky Stautute btw* only one reason why SB 211 was such a "bad idea" for KY hunters fwiw)...... the first go around......then changed back , when the full expansion did NOT take place....so much for that "fact".....They WILL change again, and rather soon, so again , so much for "that".....


REALLY thats sounds illegal....yet you admit they did nothing illegal. Help me out here ACE because the perception is YOU sided with the ( biased) KDFW and the legislature took that away from you. Looks liek they were going to give you 10 days to start. that sure seems like 10 times more than you said they were going to give you. Help us out here.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Your perception is a bit warped. That chip is showing again.



Not nearly as badly as some's........:darkbeer: 

NO "chip" here, and I'm not bitter either, just hoping some will learn from the many mistakes made here in KY (you'd think by now you'd grasp that simple concept)

I DO however think it could have been handled MUCH better, if you don't , fine by me, others however might not feel the same way........


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Not nearly as badly as some's........:darkbeer:
> 
> NO "chip" here, and I'm not bitter either, just hoping some will learn from the many mistakes made here in KY (you'd think by now you'd grasp that simple concept)( like trusting you to accurately portray any information)
> 
> I DO however think it could have been handled MUCH better, if you don't , fine by me, others however might not feel the same way........


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> AS for the KY regs.........they WERE changed(by amendment,(*something NOT allowed to be done on a Ky Stautute btw* only one reason why SB 211 was such a "bad idea" for KY hunters fwiw)...... the first go around......then changed back , when the full expansion did NOT take place....so much for that "fact".....They WILL change again, and rather soon, so again , so much for "that".....
> 
> 
> REALLY thats sounds illegal....yet you admit they did nothing illegal. Help me out here ACE because the perception is YOU sided with the ( biased) KDFW and the legislature took that away from you. Looks liek they were going to give you 10 days to start. that sure seems like 10 times more than you said they were going to give you. Help us out here.



I have NO clue about what you're trying to ask here......WE got an expansion in the end, that is the fact of the matter, despite the tactics used to insure we would not......


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I have NO clue about what you're trying to ask here......WE got an expansion in the end, that is the fact of the matter, despite the tactics used to insure we would not......


Duh, its saying you said they did something dirtyor illegal when in fact they did not. Sounds like your a liar again. What's all the scuttle butt and a using a nuke to kill a rat? Ive read both bills just so you know. surely you can answer the rest


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Oh yeah, one other point I forgot to mention. It's about all this "compromise" business.
> 
> When there was talk about a xbow compromise last summer, one of UCBK's officers (Tom Conely aka Multidigits) attended a wildlife committee meeting at KDFWR. No xbow opponents were present.
> 
> *During that meeting, one of the KDFWR commissioners, who obviously didn't like the fact that anybody had the gall to challenge a Dept decision, stated his belief that the LRC wasn't going to let the expanded season stand. He then instructed Mr. Gassett to get a "compromise" season in place for 2005, so they could shove the entire expanded season down the bowhunter's throats in 2006. *
> 
> 
> Those meetings were public meetings and were *taped. *
> 
> 
> *We got a copy of those tapes *and *fortunately did not agree to this compromise. *
> 
> This is actually what led to the second self-serving survey and the second passage of the expanded season.


There YOU go Marvin........not only have I shown you what you said you don't remember (Ballard stating they wouldn't take any compromise because of that "threat" albeit from ONLY ONE of NINE sitting commisioners) I've also shown you the TAPES not only exist but exactly as I stated Ballard also has 'em.........nice try....."no cigar" I'm no liar.....simple as that


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Duh, its saying you said they did something dirtyor illegal when in fact they did not. Sounds like your a liar again. What's all the scuttle butt and a using a nuke to kill a rat?
> 
> Ive read both bills just so you know. surely you can answer the rest
> IF you have read them both (and read better than you keep score)......AND understand KY law and the difference in a STATUTE and a REG.........then I don't need to expalain why changing the way it's done is "dangerous" IF you don't understand those key points you should seek advice from some KY lawyers just as I did to have a complete understanding of WHY....


I stand by my statement of using a NUKE to kill a rat.......as well as my opinion of the "fallout" being inevitable NOW........NO reason for YOU to care being NOT in KY.........ONLY WE have to be concerned with this........yoiu can either learn from it .....or continue to "mock" the truth......it's not however funny to those of us, who through NO actions of our own(including those who had NO side on this issue, which was a large number) it's US who are so concerned and for good reasons........

YOU talk about the AR and PETA.........and "Pandora's box" when it suits your spin.........but when it's REALLY opened by the other side you make it out to be joke.........and that's very sad, and I doubt many in Ky who realize the risks taken and the very possible outcomes of that, find it at all amuzing........when/if they begin to occur(which many of us including Ky lawyers expect)............NONE of us will be laughing.......do you always take such comfort in other's suffering??? Or is it a "Ky thing" for you........


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> There YOU go Marvin........not only have I shown you what you said you don't remember (Ballard stating they wouldn't take any compromise because of that "threat" albeit from ONLY ONE of NINE sitting commisioners) I've also shown you the TAPES not only exist but exactly as I stated Ballard also has 'em.........nice try....."no cigar" I'm no liar.....simple as that


 that is the proof the dept was going to expand the entire season reguardless, they even released the seasons wrong,.... wonder why? Well so they would have some mad people to call their commissioners and complain they just went out and spent blah, blah ,blah on a crossbow and now the season was pulled.


Ace I am still wondering about that shake out raccoon season. What happened to it?


----------



## aceoky

Marvin you said "What did the bill say ? try not to lie about it as hard as it may seem. 

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

NO need to lie (and I wouldn't anyway, win/lose/draw, I will do whichever based on truth, unlike some)...

THE BILL kept the EXISTING crossbow season........10 Days exactly as it already WAS ................NOW you ask yourself, 

WHY would there be ANY need to duplicate an existing law just as it exists...........

YOU think about that ..........for awhile.........


----------



## Marvin

*Guess who said these quotes*

Dr. Gassett "didn't make a move" other than for full expansion ever........being forced to comply to something by the Legislature is hardly a move, and had you bothered to read what I did in fact say, you would know exactly what I will and will not accept less than.......*IF we don't get the Oct -Dec whole thing, bet on us getting it all*......*And NO I will not accept things as they are now*.....this on/off/on/off is not acceptable in any way or regards to us.......period......and there is NO good reason for it in the first place( I had already stated that above anyway)


I thought you were happy with what you got?

It isn't....and it will NOT stand "as is", believe me or not, doesn't matter and won't matter, it's simple really IF anyone wants this to end now, this will be done, and if not........*we'll keep right on fighting for the whole thing*, it's up to them.....give us a little or we'll end up with the whole season as first proposed......I know where Dr. Gassett stands on this and the full commision as most should know.....*some are playing with fire*, they should know how to not be burned,we'll soon see IF they do or not...
more of the same

But he backed the stupid SB211 even after being notified(again I know he was) about all the *risks* involved in doing so, and last time I checked it was still on his website(probably a month or so ago!)......even after being killed, it seems he is "proud" to have been a part of trying to* "ruin" Ky's proven system of wildlife management*, still though some say he is a "friend of the sportsman".....
fill us in Ace how did this hurt KY wildlife management system? Do you want me to post the bill 211?? its says you get 10 days to crossbow hunt? how is that a nuke option?


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin you said "What did the bill say ? try not to lie about it as hard as it may seem.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> NO need to lie (and I wouldn't anyway, win/lose/draw, I will do whichever based on truth, unlike some)...
> 
> THE BILL kept the EXISTING crossbow season........10 Days exactly as it already WAS ................NOW you ask yourself,
> 
> WHY would there be ANY need to duplicate an existing law just as it exists...........
> 
> YOU think about that ..........for awhile.........


that would have stopped the expansion by krs and crossbow hunters would have had a safer season because a krs is much harder to change than a regulation


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Marvin you said "What did the bill say ? try not to lie about it as hard as it may seem.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> NO need to lie (and I wouldn't anyway, win/lose/draw, I will do whichever based on truth, unlike some)...
> 
> THE BILL kept the EXISTING crossbow season........10 Days exactly as it already WAS ................NOW you ask yourself,
> 
> WHY would there be ANY need to duplicate an existing law just as it exists...........
> 
> YOU think about that ..........for awhile.........


duplicate a law does what ace? nothing but reinstate the original one? whats your point?


----------



## Marvin

Give Us The **** Season Report Ace!!


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> duplicate a law does what ace? nothing but reinstate the original one? whats your point?


REally? When exactly was the law "repealed" to need reinstating?


Except ONE was a Statute, the other a Reg.......therin lies the problems..and that's NOT how seasons should EVER be set, it's a Ky law issue and not a "social issue"......which is why many on both sides fought against it, whether you believe it or care doesn't change the facts.......so are you always so happy for other's suffering??? 

To defend stupid actions for stupid reasons is ___________ ......'nuff said on that


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Give Us The **** Season Report Ace!!


Nope "off topic" and NOT relevent to any of this.....keep waiting though, IF you'd like


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> that would have stopped the expansion by krs and crossbow hunters would have had a safer season because a krs is much harder to change than a regulation


That's absurd and foolish......


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Dr. Gassett "didn't make a move" other than for full expansion ever........being forced to comply to something by the Legislature is hardly a move, and had you bothered to read what I did in fact say, you would know exactly what I will and will not accept less than.......*IF we don't get the Oct -Dec whole thing, bet on us getting it all*......*And NO I will not accept things as they are now*.....this on/off/on/off is not acceptable in any way or regards to us.......period......and there is NO good reason for it in the first place( I had already stated that above anyway)
> 
> 
> I thought you were happy with what you got?
> 
> Good point , thanks for reminding me and encouraging me to continue to push forward for more opportunity in KY.......
> 
> It isn't....and it will NOT stand "as is", believe me or not, doesn't matter and won't matter, it's simple really IF anyone wants this to end now, this will be done, and if not........*we'll keep right on fighting for the whole thing*, it's up to them.....give us a little or we'll end up with the whole season as first proposed......I know where Dr. Gassett stands on this and the full commision as most should know.....*some are playing with fire*, they should know how to not be burned,we'll soon see IF they do or not...
> more of the same
> 
> What else would I expect from you or your side??
> 
> But he backed the stupid SB211 even after being notified(again I know he was) about all the *risks* involved in doing so, and last time I checked it was still on his website(probably a month or so ago!)......even after being killed, it seems he is "proud" to have been a part of trying to* "ruin" Ky's proven system of wildlife management*, still though some say he is a "friend of the sportsman".....
> fill us in Ace how did this hurt KY wildlife management system? Do you want me to post the bill 211?? its says you get 10 days to crossbow hunt? how is that a nuke option?


Post whatever you want to post, WE have done the research, it's a "legal precident" IF you don't "get it" fine by me, but please stop posting this misinformation.......besides the fact it doesn't in any way affect YOU , it still does every hunter and fisherman in KY.........YOU and your spin doesn't and won't change that fact........the risks (again) were pointed out to them, they went forward anyway.......IF you want to "condone" that, it would be your choice IF you lived in Ky (you don't)......IOW your opinion on this is "moot", it doesn't affect you, the NEXT thing done in your state just might, then maybe YOu'll care????

WE do care , as it affects US.........glad YOU think it's so "funny" now, IF it ever comes your way, maybe you'll be met with support and maybe you'll have another Marvin making fun of your situation........who knows????

Since it could "come your way", it might be sound advice to NOT condone such behavior, as Hunters why is it so hard to support each other against stupid changes?????


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> that is the proof the dept was going to expand the entire season reguardless, they even released the seasons wrong,.... wonder why?
> 
> NO they didn't ,tbe expansion passed, the definition of "legal archery equip was even changed to include the crossbow, things WERE done as they always have been some did manage to change that, however that only proves some will go to any lengths to get what they want for themselves......"win" they call that....sad too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well so they would have some mad people to call their commissioners and complain they just went out and spent blah, blah ,blah on a crossbow and now the season was pulled.
> 
> Yeah , make fun of ALL the small archery shops who lost so badly because of the tactics you guys used.......that's a "great idea", unless you happen to be one of the owners of those shops and YOUR family suffered because of what you guys did.........I guess then, it is a different matter entirely, could have and should have been handled much better, also make fun of the hunters who bought their crossbows due to the new season that was STOLEN out from under them..........
> 
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> OR we could just all simply admit,once it was "done" and the shops stocked up on the cb AND hunters were buying them, it should have been "left alone" at least for that season........IF for no other reason for their sake.......but that would have been too easy, and wouldn't cause division.......can't allow any of that now can we........
> 
> Again, you guys ONLY needed to sway ONE commisioner "your way", instead of that you guys lost the four you had......most can tell from that fact; what is "what".....


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> ace you said this
> 
> Sorry, you lose on this one without doubt or question, I don't know maybe it's not that way in Ohio, but down this way, women, youth and senior hunters ARE embracing the concept, that's good for all....
> 
> 
> 
> Duh no crapola. so are teh people to lazy to pick up a bow who will be the majority of users. Women children and seniors could have been given the bypass on this and nobody would have cared a bit. Yet you hide behind them like a muslim extremist using them as a shield for cause. Classic example of bombing a red cross medical building. Why not focus your efforts on NASP? Thats too easy...what do you get out of this? Nobody takes this kind of beating for nothing. Not even you.


lazy plays no rational role in game seasons. Compounds are arguably for those too lazy to learn how to use a trad bow. what guarantees compound archers-or even trads-will actually practice


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> ace you said this
> 
> Sorry, you lose on this one without doubt or question, I don't know maybe it's not that way in Ohio, but down this way, women, youth and senior hunters ARE embracing the concept, that's good for all....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Women children and seniors could have been given the bypass on this and nobody would have cared a bit.
> 
> Not so easily, and you have NO point anyway, there is NO good reason for the exclusion, we've gained ground , some don't like it, but we have nevertheless...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet you hide behind them like a muslim extremist using them as a shield for cause.
> I have no reason to "hide" at all , much less from (or using) a major reason for my supporting this, a fact you'd long have known, if you had paid attention; I've done the research posted the data, I honeslty believe that .......others may not, that's fine by me.....especially IF they've spent the time on the issue I have and then decided what they believe, sadly most have not and base serious matters on "feelings" not facts and data......that likley will also change and soon
> 
> 
> .what do you get out of this? Nobody takes this kind of beating for nothing. Not even you.


What "beating"??? 

that's funny! 

What do I get out of this??

Knowing that many (and yes, many of these youth, women and senior hunters) NOW have a much more fair cb season, and that I played a part in that.......

NO more , no less.......regardless of what you may "thinK" or believe.....Many have already thanked me for what I've done, and.......

I was NEVER in this for myself, some find it nearly impossible to believe that some of US, actually care about other hunters........what's sad is that they don't........

So *I* really didn't benefit nor "profit" from this, other than helping other hunters who sought my help, THAT is enough for me.....thanks for asking......:cocktail:

OH yeah, (almost forgot) One other thing I *HOPE *to get out of this is to be able to use the P-R additional funds to aquire more public land for those who need it........that would make this expansion even better than it already is for Ky....

It seems that many though who state their concerns over public land and crowding, however aren't so quick to take action, simply content to complain and do no more........as usual


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> lazy plays no rational role in game seasons. Compounds are arguably for those too lazy to learn how to use a trad bow. *what guarantees compound archers-or even trads-will actually practice*


They *say* they do??? 

Never mind anyone who's been around an archey shop the last three days before season starts knows the real truth.........that's "different" though somehow.... 

Again great points and post!


----------



## aceoky

Ballard, when you get back, how about answering something???

I have had good reason to believe (and for some time now btw) the SOLE purpose of SB 211 was to FORCE the KDFWR into a "lesser expansion", thus it being voted on was never even expected....much less a real issue.....IS this true???

IF it is, then we can agree it served that purpose very well......(it was drafted rather late ,which had to hurt it's chances of making the "deadline"... and after it was very apparant to all, WE would have full expansion........after all)


----------



## Jim C

aceoky said:


> They *say* they do???
> 
> Never mind anyone who's been around an archey shop the last three days before season starts knows the real truth.........that's "different" though somehow....
> 
> Again great points and post!


Let me explain the thinking. The antis think that because to master a compound bow takes a few more hours or days this time cost will keep ethical people from hunting if they don't want to spend the time. They also think that because they (most of those who whine about xbows are more gungho than the average Friday Night wonder) spend more time practicing, that gives them more right to bowhunt.

The problem with this logic is that there are compound hunters who never practice and more than a few trads who don't practice and lots who haven't practiced enough. There are also xbow archers who don't practice or don't practice enough. what is worse? I know someone who is going to wound a deer is bad news. Now if we are dealing with purely ethical people, an ethical person who doesn't have time to practice enough will 1) buy a weapon he can master with less time (crossbow) or not hunt. This is what people like Free Range bank on-ban xbows and those time constrained people won't compete with him for "his deer"

However, this attitude is based on a flaw-that all people are ethical and know their limitations. You keep xbows out and there will still be tons of people who haven't practiced enough-yet wounding deer or poor hunters isn't what worries Source and Free range-they worry about the competition and more people hunting, not the slobs or incompetent compound archers or trad archers who really would be better off using a weapon they can master with less time. Its all about "me" for those anti xbow types.

what source and Free Range and the rest of the "its too easy" crowd ignore is that there is no guarantee people practice and there are lots of xbow hunters who practice all the time and the assumptions of source et al are idiotic when dealing with them


----------



## spec

So you are the master that KNOWS(for a fact) what everyone else thinks? Now that was a fact-laden post!


----------



## JavaMan

maybe I am slow but what happened before and now after in Kentucky?

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

spec said:


> So you are the master that KNOWS(for a fact) what everyone else thinks? Now that was a fact-laden post!



30 years of listening to the evasions, the lies, the changing reasons yes I know what motivates the anti xbow types. Ask an anti why they are against xbows you will get circular reasoning. mindless drivel or pure BS

it all comes back to the reasons I have stated.

none can actually answer why they worry so much what another guy uses a county over. instead we get the gun nonsense or the "its not a bow BS"


----------



## spec

You are right, Jim. Your opinions are always 100% correct and you know more than anyone else as to the reasons they make the stands that they do. The hunting world is oh so lucky to have you you blessing us all with your knowledge/facts. Thank you so much for allowing us to be in your arena. The rest of us were just aimlessly roaming the earth until you gave us direction. Thanks again for your opinion laden posts that you state as facts. If only the rest of us knew as much..........


----------



## Jim C

spec said:


> You are right, Jim. Your opinions are always 100% correct and you know more than anyone else as to the reasons they make the stands that they do. The hunting world is oh so lucky to have you you blessing us all with your knowledge/facts. Thank you so much for allowing us to be in your arena. The rest of us were just aimlessly roaming the earth until you gave us direction. Thanks again for your opinion laden posts that you state as facts. If only the rest of us knew as much..........



always glad to help


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> what source and Free Range and the rest of the "its too easy" crowd ignore is that there is no guarantee people practice and there are lots of xbow hunters who practice all the time and the assumptions of source et al are idiotic when dealing with them


Totally wrong as usual - and, as always, in the improper context.

When someone labels crossbow hunters as "lazy", they are not referring to their practice schedule. They are referring to the fact that these individuals could not be bothered to learn to bowhunt until the crossbow was legalized.

If your arguement is that these folks want to be included in archery season, then the question really is "Why weren't they already out there?" 

If bowhunting is that important to them, WHY were they not already trying to bowhunt?

WHY are they waiting for something that is so gunlike that it requires no archery skills before the will enter archery season?

It leads to another question.... Since the crossbow has a stock, a scope and a trigger, is locked and loaded continuously, and operates like a gun, since it enables those who have shown absolutely NO interest in bowhunting to suddenly capitalize on an arrowflinging stringgun that requires them to learn no new skills and enter a season that has ALWAYS required learning archery skills to be succesful, does it really belong?

The answer seems obvious to me - it does not belong. *If people want to hunt in bowseason, they should be willing to do what we have all had to do to enter it. Learn to draw, hold, anchor, aim, release, and follow through with enough acccuracy and power to quickly and efficiently harvest big game.*

If they are unwilling to do that - they should wait for a hunting season that more closely matches the effort that they ARE willing to expend to be in.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Totally wrong as usual - and, as always, in the improper context.
> 
> When someone labels crossbow hunters as "lazy", they are not referring to their practice schedule. They are referring to the fact that these individuals could not be bothered to learn to bowhunt until the crossbow was legalized.
> 
> If your arguement is that these folks want to be included in archery season, then the question really is "Why weren't they already out there?"
> 
> If bowhunting is that important to them, WHY were they not already trying to bowhunt?
> 
> WHY are they waiting for something that is so gunlike that it requires no archery skills before the will enter archery season?
> 
> It leads to another question.... Since the crossbow has a stock, a scope and a trigger, is locked and loaded continuously, and operates like a gun, since it enables those who have shown absolutely NO interest in bowhunting to suddenly capitalize on an arrowflinging stringgun that requires them to learn no new skills and enter a season that has ALWAYS required learning archery skills to be succesful, does it really belong?
> 
> The answer seems obvious to me - it does not belong. *If people want to hunt in bowseason, they should be willing to do what we have all had to do to enter it. Learn to draw, hold, anchor, aim, release, and follow through with enough acccuracy and power to quickly and efficiently harvest big game.*
> 
> If they are unwilling to do that - they should wait for a hunting season that more closely matches the effort that they ARE willing to expend to be in.



why source-what good comes from forcing someone to spend time doing that if they don't want to-other than creating a barrier so someone like you can feel better

I spent 30 years learning a finger release and working on it. a 50 dollar release allows some one to have a better release than 95% of the top olympic style recurve archers in the world. is that fair? who cares? ITS A RECREATIONAL ACTIVITY.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> why source-what good comes from forcing someone to spend time doing that if they don't want to



If they "DO NOT WANT TO" learn to shoot a bow - WHY in the world should they have any claim whatsoever to bowseason?

We ALL had to decide at some point if the rewards of bowhunting would be worth the effort involved to do so. If they "don't want to" spend time learning to shoot a bow, then they don't have to - but that means that each of them has made the decision to be left out .... in otherwords THEY have VOLUNTARILY excluded THEMSELVES from bowseason.

That is OK - no need to circumvent the system or allow a shortcut to the process. What should be done, however, is a separate season provided for those who are willing to expend some, but not all, of the effort. 

Different rewards for different levels of commitment and effort expended - sounds fair to me.

In actuality, this is what the KY compromise has done to some level.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> If they "DO NOT WANT TO" learn to shoot a bow - WHY in the world should they have any claim whatsoever to bowseason?
> 
> We ALL had to decide at some point if the rewards of bowhunting would be worth the effort involved to do so. If they "don't want to" spend time learning to shoot a bow, then they don't have to - but that means that each of them has made the decision to be left out .... in otherwords THEY have VOLUNTARILY excluded THEMSELVES from bowseason.
> 
> That is OK - no need to circumvent the system or allow a shortcut to the process. What should be done, however, is a separate season provided for those who are willing to expend some, but not all, of the effort.
> 
> Different rewards for different levels of commitment and effort expended - sounds fair to me.
> 
> In actuality, this is what the KY compromise has done to some level.


thanks for proving what I have always known

they want to bowhunt-that is all that matters as long as they can make an ethical shot with a bow

a crossbow allows that to be done with less time
that is good

a compound cut the learning curve from months-maybe years to weeks or days

that was good

we don't need fascist mentality at play in a recreational activity

you have no right to exclude people based on your feelings of increased worthiness

thanks for putting down in writing what really motivates people like you
I will use it in the future


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> thanks for proving what I have always known
> 
> they want to bowhunt-that is all that matters as long as they can make an ethical shot with a bow
> 
> a crossbow allows that to be done with less time
> that is good
> 
> a compound cut the learning curve from months-maybe years to weeks or days
> 
> that was good
> 
> we don't need fascist mentality at play in a recreational activity
> 
> you have no right to exclude people based on your feelings of increased worthiness
> 
> 
> thanks for putting down in writing what really motivates people like you
> I will use it in the future


 Well according to you a compound is just as easy to use so why cant the people you speak of use them?


----------



## thesource

Two big problems with what you wrote, here....



Jim C said:


> they want to bowhunt-that is all that matters as long as they can make an ethical shot with a bow


You already stated they were unwilling to spend the time to learn to bowhunt...that means they DO NOT REALLY want to bowhunt after all. They just want to be able to hunt during the bowseason with some weapon other than a bow. That's a big difference, and a big gap in your reasoning.




Jim C said:


> you have no right to exclude people based on your feelings of increased worthiness


As I stated, I am not excluding anyone. They have voluntarily excluded themselves by determining that learning to bowhunt is not a high enough priority for them to expend the energy and comittment on.

As for you using this for the future, I have No doubt you will take it out of context, twist it around, and misrepresent what was actually meant here.

Its what you do best.


----------



## Jim C

as usual you are confused-you confuse wanting to spend X amount of time practicing a small part of bowhunting (at least since compounds and releases came along) with wanting to bowhunt

people who bowhunt with compounds didn't want to spend learning how to aim without a sight, or peep sight, to train to hold a 50-70 pound longbow or to master a finger release. they wanted to bowhunt-they just didn't want to learn the three toughest skills that a traditional or olympic style archer spends most of their time training for.

nothing wrong with that

you have yet to tell anyone why society should care about this. why is society better preventing people from bowhunting just because they would rather not learn how to hook a release on a string and look through a peep on the string etc but would rather use a crossbow


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Well according to you a compound is just as easy to use so why cant the people you speak of use them?



you are lying again

why don't you tell us why it matters to you what form of archery equipment another citizen wants to use when the bottom line is that they don't have an advantage over you (assuming you can shoot a compound bow)


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> as usual you are confused-you confuse wanting to spend X amount of time practicing a small part of bowhunting (at least since compounds and releases came along) with wanting to bowhunt


No, No.

YOU are confused.

It is not just about practicing.

If they truly WANT to bowhunt, nothing is stopping them in any of our 50 states. They currently exclude themselves from bowseason because they have decided that the rewards of bowhunting are not worth the time and energy to achieve them.

That means they have made a CONSCIOUS decision that they DO NOT want to bowhunt.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> No, No.
> 
> YOU are confused.
> 
> It is not just about practicing.
> 
> If they truly WANT to bowhunt, nothing is stopping them in any of our 50 states. They currently exclude themselves from bowseason because they have decided that the rewards of bowhunting are not worth the time and energy to achieve them.
> 
> That means they have made a CONSCIOUS decision that they DO NOT want to bowhunt.



ths stupid semantic evasions we have come to expect from you

thanks Source-your inability to answer the question proves what we already know

you want to impose artificial barriers that have nothing to do with sound game management

you want to keep people out of " your season" so you can feel better about yourself while KY Mustang doesn't want any more people shooting at "his deer"

its so obvious


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> ths stupid semantic evasions we have come to expect from you
> 
> you want to impose artificial barriers that have nothing to do with sound game management


They are not "artificail barriers."

They are the legitimate and historic requirements of bowseason....be able to shoot a bow.

You want to modify these requirements to the point that NO archery skills are required to enter bowseason - seems like a dumb idea to me.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> They are not "artificail barriers."
> 
> They are the legitimate and historic requirements of bowseason....be able to shoot a bow.
> 
> You want to modify these requirements to the point that NO archery skills are required to enter bowseason - seems like a dumb idea to me.



what stupidity. You admit to being a non-archer so where do you get off talking about archery skills when its BOWHUNTING skills that matter and you need bowhunting skills to take game with any kind of bow

Compounds modified things substantially
that got more people hunting even though the luddite whiners claimed it would "ruin bowhunting"

it didn't

history in Ohio has proven you wrong just as history proved the selfish trad luddites wrong

tell me why a "tradition" that was anti technology and anti inclusion is one that society should support

you still have been unable to explain why we should cling to a prejudice based on a tradition -you have to justify the tradition for sound reasons other than "that's the way it used to be"


----------



## thesource

We have already demonstrated that these people do not want to bowhunt - but they are willing to hunt during bowseason if you remove the historical requirement of having to use a bow. Ohio simply proves that there are a lot of these people.


You can see now how these people cannot be bowhunters ... each and every one of them had the opportunity to bowhunt and had to contemplate whether or not to become a bowhunter, and chose not to.


----------



## JavaMan

a crossbow is a bow. I am still waiting for someone to tell me what happened before and after in Kentucky. It's hard to muddle through all the posts.

Thanks

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> We have already demonstrated that these people do not want to bowhunt - but they are willing to hunt during bowseason if you remove the historical requirement of having to use a bow. Ohio simply proves that there are a lot of these people.
> 
> 
> You can see now how these people cannot be bowhunters ... each and every one of them had the opportunity to bowhunt and had to contemplate whether or not to become a bowhunter, and chose not to.



ah when source can't answer tough questions he resorts to the bs that a crossbow isn't a bow. well source, a compound wasn't a LEGAL HUNTING bow-that was changed in terms of the law. only morons claimed a compound wasn't a bow at all and hiding behind changing legal definitions is cowardly

crossbows are bows-now argue the point without semantic games

people who want to bowhunt with crossbows want to bowhunt

demonstrate that is harmful to society (OH I FORGOT-you already CONCEDED that there is no harm)


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> you are lying again
> 
> why don't you tell us why it matters to you what form of archery equipment another citizen wants to use when the bottom line is that they don't have an advantage over you (assuming you can shoot a compound bow)


 I am not lying, you said right above you do not feel the crosbow has an advantage. I say it does have several advantages.
If it does not why cant the people you speak of use a compound? Why will they not use a compound if they want to hunt during archery season.
I am concerned with Ky's b&c buck resources for one. You do know we have rifle season during the rut. You would think Ohio would be ranked up there with Illinois on the b&c , but Ky seems to be ahead for some reason.


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> I am not lying, you said right above you do not feel the crosbow has an advantage. I say it does have several advantages.
> If it does not why cant the people you speak of use a compound? Why will they not use a compound if they want to hunt during archery season.
> I am concerned with Ky's b&c buck resources for one. You do know we have rifle season during the rut. You would think Ohio would be ranked up there with Illinois on the b&c , but Ky seems to be ahead for some reason.


given you have no experience in xbow archery you are pretty much speculating and ease of use advantages (conceded) have no relevance to harvest rate advantages (which do not exist)

why do you care if they want to use a compound, a trad bow or a crossbow? why do you want to impose your position on them? I don't tell compound archers they ought to learn how to shoot a recurve bow so what is your urgency of imposing your values on others in a recreational activity OTHER THAN THE FACT you want to keep them out of "your season"?


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> given you have no experience in xbow archery you are pretty much speculating and ease of use advantages (conceded) have no relevance to harvest rate advantages (which do not exist)
> 
> why do you care if they want to use a compound, a trad bow or a crossbow? why do you want to impose your position on them? I don't tell compound archers they ought to learn how to shoot a recurve bow so what is your urgency of imposing your values on others in a recreational activity OTHER THAN THE FACT you want to keep them out of "your season"?


For your information I have shot a crossbow, a recurve , and a long bow. I do in fact own a recurve.
My point that Ohio has been behind on b&c bucks is fact. Does Ohio allow rifles for deer hunting? Does Ohio have a firearm hunt during the rut? Now you tell me why ohio is falling behind when it is managed close to the way Illinois is other than the crossbow wide open season. Tell me why Ky is ahead of Ohio ,and up there with the top states. We have a disadvantage to them because of our modern Firearm season being during the rut, but I would not want it changed personally.
I care that the weapons have a seperate season because I am concered with our resource. The bottom line is the crossbow has several advantages and you know it.
It is not my season Jim its everyones. Being a resident of Ky I have a right to express my feelings on the hunting seasons here. You are the one that is a (nonresident I might add )trying to impose your crossbow opinions to us Ky residents. I have not imposed one thing on ohio's season' s so keep your nose out of Ky matters .


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> For your information I have shot a crossbow, a recurve , and a long bow. I do in fact own a recurve.
> My point that Ohio has been behind on b&c bucks is fact. Does Ohio allow rifles for deer hunting? Does Ohio have a firearm hunt during the rut? Now you tell me why ohio is falling behind when it is managed close to the way Illinois is other than the crossbow wide open season. Tell me why Ky is ahead of Ohio ,and up there with the top states. We have a disadvantage to them because of our modern Firearm season being during the rut, but I would not want it changed personally.
> I care that the weapons have a seperate season because I am concered with our resource. The bottom line is the crossbow has several advantages and you know it.
> It is not my season Jim its everyones. Being a resident of Ky I have a right to express my feelings on the hunting seasons here. You are the one that is a (nonresident I might add )trying to impose your crossbow opinions to us Ky residents. I have not imposed one thing on ohio's season' s so keep your nose out of Ky matters .


nice evasions and I have a right to point out the paucity of logic in your position and the evasions and diversions you engage in rather than honestly admitting what motivates you

in labor law discrimination is a major legal topic. nowadays very few people will admit that they denied someone a job because of the employee's race or gender. thus to prove discrimination, the supreme court established what is called the "burdine" burden shifting analysis

a plaintiff has to establish a "prima facie" case of discrimination. a typical one for race would be that the plaintiff was treated worse than a similarly situated employee who is not of the same race or gender as the plaintiff

the burden then shifts to the employer to articulate a non discriminatory reason for its actions

once that is done, the plaintiff then must show that the employer's reason is not the true reason but pretext. while the law has been unsettled in this as to whether proving the employer's reason a lie establishes discrimination or another step is needed, (St Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks vs some of the O'Connor decisions in "mixed cases") the practical bottom line in a jury trial is:

If the employer's reason is demonsrated to be false the jury almost always decides that the employer was motivated by a discriminatory animus

the point of this is that most of the anti xbow posters refuse to admit that they are motivated by greed or selfishness or a sense of self-entitlement. they thus post facades or pretextual reasons for their actions

we prove those facades false all the time

that leads me to rationally believe that a discriminatory motivation is what is truly behind the anti xbow posts

the "unfair", the "drawing in the presence of game", the "its not a bow" are all facades and all a pretext for what truly causes this opposition


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> ah when source can't answer tough questions he resorts to the bs that a crossbow isn't a bow. well source, a compound wasn't a LEGAL HUNTING bow-that was changed in terms of the law. only morons claimed a compound wasn't a bow at all and hiding behind changing legal definitions is cowardly
> 
> crossbows are bows-now argue the point without semantic games
> 
> people who want to bowhunt with crossbows want to bowhunt
> 
> demonstrate that is harmful to society (OH I FORGOT-you already CONCEDED that there is no harm)



When valid points are proven you resort to cowardly name calling and try to turn the discussion back to harm to society...which is totally STUPID because society is not harmed one bit if we use bows, crossbows, guns, or claymore mines during what is supposed to be bowseason. Society would not be hurt if NO bowseason was allowed. 

Bowhunters may be hurt by those choices, of course ... but society would not be.

Go back and reread my posts, you will see where you and I together PROVED that those who are not committed enough to learn to use a bow have decided to exclude themselves from bowseason.


We have proven that there are people who want to hunt in bowseason that are not bowhunters, that have DECIDED not to be bowhunters, but who will hunt if something less demanding is available.

I think that the fact that the very same people who decide that hunting with a bow during bowseason is too hard or time consuming but hunt with a crossbow because it is not those things prove that a crossbow does not belong with other bows, and certainly proves that crossbow users do not deserve the title of "bowhunter."

After all - THEY decided, all on their own, that they couldn't or wouldn't bowhunt with a real bow and become a bowhunter. They waited (or lobbied) for something different before they would be motivated enough to learn to hunt with it. If its different, it can't be the same .... therefore, your crossbow is not a bow and those that use them will never be bowhunters.

They had their chance - and passed.


----------



## JavaMan

I suspect most of the anti can't shoot a bow or have been failures in bowhunting. I have yet to read a reasonable explanation from them on this. I am still waiting for someone to tell me what exactly happened in Kentucky.

thanks

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

I suspect those that can't shoot a bow or have been failures in bowhunting would switch to or champion crossbows. 

If you are clever enough to throw insults in your 4th post you should be clever enough to figure out what's going on all on your own.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> nice evasions and I have a right to point out the paucity of logic in your position and the evasions and diversions you engage in rather than honestly admitting what motivates you
> 
> in labor law discrimination is a major legal topic. nowadays very few people will admit that they denied someone a job because of the employee's race or gender. thus to prove discrimination, the supreme court established what is called the "burdine" burden shifting analysis
> 
> 
> a plaintiff has to establish a "prima facie" case of discrimination. a typical one for race would be that the plaintiff was treated worse than a similarly situated employee who is not of the same race or gender as the plaintiff
> 
> the burden then shifts to the employer to articulate a non discriminatory reason for its actions
> 
> once that is done, the plaintiff then must show that the employer's reason is not the true reason but pretext. while the law has been unsettled in this as to whether proving the employer's reason a lie establishes discrimination or another step is needed, (St Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks vs some of the O'Connor decisions in "mixed cases") the practical bottom line in a jury trial is:
> 
> If the employer's reason is demonsrated to be false the jury almost always decides that the employer was motivated by a discriminatory animus
> 
> the point of this is that most of the anti xbow posters refuse to admit that they are motivated by greed or selfishness or a sense of self-entitlement. they thus post facades or pretextual reasons for their actions
> 
> we prove those facades false all the time
> 
> that leads me to rationally believe that a discriminatory motivation is what is truly behind the anti xbow posts
> 
> the "unfair", the "drawing in the presence of game", the "its not a bow" are all facades and all a pretext for what truly causes this opposition


 Evasion, ha! you are funny. You have got to be a trial layer by the tactics you use.

you answer this (since you have said many times) why wont these people you speek of use a compound, after all you have proven it is no more difficult than a crossbow, right?


----------



## JavaMan

thesource said:


> I suspect those that can't shoot a bow or have been failures in bowhunting would switch to or champion crossbows.
> 
> If you are clever enough to throw insults in your 4th post you should be clever enough to figure out what's going on all on your own.


Mr Source

JimC is whipping your butt on this issue. I still want to know what the status is for Kentucky. If you know them please say so.

thanks

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> When valid points are proven you resort to cowardly name calling and try to turn the discussion back to harm to society...which is totally STUPID because society is not harmed one bit if we use bows, crossbows, guns, or claymore mines during what is supposed to be bowseason. Society would not be hurt if NO bowseason was allowed.
> 
> Bowhunters may be hurt by those choices, of course ... but society would not be.
> 
> Go back and reread my posts, you will see where you and I together PROVED that those who are not committed enough to learn to use a bow have decided to exclude themselves from bowseason.
> 
> 
> We have proven that there are people who want to hunt in bowseason that are not bowhunters, that have DECIDED not to be bowhunters, but who will hunt if something less demanding is available.
> 
> I think that the fact that the very same people who decide that hunting with a bow during bowseason is too hard or time consuming but hunt with a crossbow because it is not those things prove that a crossbow does not belong with other bows, and certainly proves that crossbow users do not deserve the title of "bowhunter."
> 
> After all - THEY decided, all on their own, that they couldn't or wouldn't bowhunt with a real bow and become a bowhunter. They waited (or lobbied) for something different before they would be motivated enough to learn to hunt with it. If its different, it can't be the same .... therefore, your crossbow is not a bow and those that use them will never be bowhunters.
> 
> They had their chance - and passed.


when you can make a valid point let me know Source

that you think people ought to meet your standards hardly is valid. its a recreational activity-imposing time costs on others is selfish and stupid

bowhunters' egos are not a valid thing to protect. how are bowhunters hurt? because someone might confuse them with a bowhunter who uses a crossbow? because they are upset they had to practice a few days or hours more than some guy with a crossbow? of all the lamer BS idiotic arguments that's the most stupid and believe me, I've seen lots of emotion based bs from your side

step up source-tell me how other bowhunters are hurt

all of your smarmy arrogant insults of crossbow hunters can be levelled at compound hunters or even trad hunters who use dacron strings, store bought arrows or fiberglas backed bows.

it all comes down to self esteem issues which have no place making public policy


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Evasion, ha! you are funny. You have got to be a trial layer by the tactics you use.
> 
> you answer this (since you have said many times) why wont these people you speek of use a compound, after all you have proven it is no more difficult than a crossbow, right?


who cares-why won't most compound archers use a recurve

they may not want to spend the time

they may have physical limitations

they may find a crossbow more appealing

why do you worry about it-no one is ever going to tell you you have to use a crossbow

why do you feel a need to impose your desires on others?


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> who cares-why won't most compound archers use a recurve,
> most can and would if the regulations required it
> 
> they may not want to spend the time ,please explain a little more about this one :zip:
> 
> they may have physical limitations they can get a permit, so this example holds no water
> 
> they may find a crossbow more appealingso they do not want to bow hunt, please explain this reason a little more also, I think it runs more along with your first reason
> 
> why do you worry about it-no one is ever going to tell you you have to use a crossbow why are you worried about Ky? I am concerned with our resource and the quality of hunting in Ky
> 
> why do you feel a need to impose your desires on others?


why do you impose yours?


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> why do you impose yours?



you clearly have a rather stilted understanding of free choice and american values.

I don't think you have any credibility claiming that people who want to use crossbows to hunt in BOW SEASON or ARCHERY season don't want to bowhunt anymore than someone who uses a compound bow.

Its so funny seeing you all recycle the same losing arguments that didn't work thirty years ago


----------



## ballard

Jim C said:


> nice evasions and I have a right to point out the paucity of logic in your position and the evasions and diversions you engage in rather than honestly admitting what motivates you
> 
> in labor law discrimination is a major legal topic. nowadays very few people will admit that they denied someone a job because of the employee's race or gender. thus to prove discrimination, the supreme court established what is called the "burdine" burden shifting analysis
> 
> a plaintiff has to establish a "prima facie" case of discrimination. a typical one for race would be that the plaintiff was treated worse than a similarly situated employee who is not of the same race or gender as the plaintiff
> 
> the burden then shifts to the employer to articulate a non discriminatory reason for its actions
> 
> once that is done, the plaintiff then must show that the employer's reason is not the true reason but pretext. while the law has been unsettled in this as to whether proving the employer's reason a lie establishes discrimination or another step is needed, (St Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks vs some of the O'Connor decisions in "mixed cases") the practical bottom line in a jury trial is:
> 
> If the employer's reason is demonsrated to be false the jury almost always decides that the employer was motivated by a discriminatory animus
> 
> the point of this is that most of the anti xbow posters refuse to admit that they are motivated by greed or selfishness or a sense of self-entitlement. they thus post facades or pretextual reasons for their actions
> 
> we prove those facades false all the time
> 
> that leads me to rationally believe that a discriminatory motivation is what is truly behind the anti xbow posts
> 
> the "unfair", the "drawing in the presence of game", the "its not a bow" are all facades and all a pretext for what truly causes this opposition


Wait a second, Jim. The type of discrimination you described deals with primarily immutable characteristics such as age, sex, race, ethnicity, etc., and it applies to people not objects (such as a crossbow). 

Crossbow users do not fall into any protected class. Nobody that hunts with a crossbow doesn't have the option to shoot a gun or a bow or a ML or a pistol if they want to hunt in of those respective seasons.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> you clearly have a rather stilted understanding of free choice and american values.
> 
> I don't think you have any credibility claiming that people who want to use crossbows to hunt in BOW SEASON or ARCHERY season don't want to bowhunt anymore than someone who uses a compound bow.
> 
> Its so funny seeing you all recycle the same losing arguments that didn't work thirty years ago


You are welcome to think what ever you want Jim. but the bottom line is you are wrong. And in most states what you want is illegal.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> that you think people ought to meet your standards hardly is valid. its a recreational activity-imposing time costs on others is selfish and stupid


Hardly.

Why stop at crossbows, then - why not allow anyone to use whatever their heart desires at any time?

Slippery slope.

No, you are wrong. And the points are totally valid. Anyone, EVERYONE, could bowhunt if that's what they wanted to do.

Some don't, and decide to hunt with other weapons. That's fine, and their should be a time and place for them.

But not bowseason, since they are clearly NOT bowhunters.

Why won't you answer this question? If they truly want to hunt during bowseason...If they truly want to be recognized as a bowhunter....WHY won't they hunt with a bow?


----------



## ballard

Ace - Wait a second there, big fella. 

A. SB 211 had the backing of most of the House and Senate leaders. 

B. It came out of the AG committee in plenty of time to pass, and your suggestions to the contrary are patently false. If memory serves, it passed out of the AG committee 9 for and 2 against. It was already on the Senate floor ready to be voted upon when the "compromise" occurred. We had plenty of backing to bring it out of the Senate. It was returned to the Ag committee at the sponsoring Senator's request. 

C. We had several leaders in the House who were also going to back this bill. Rob Wilkey was going to sponsor it in the House. 

D. You've "heard" that Gov. Fletcher was going to veto it? Yeah, which website did you read that on? 

E. The House bill filed by Meeks was going nowhere, ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE. You don't know what you're talking about, and I was in Frankfort enough to know what's truth and what's fiction.

F. You made this comment: "I said that it was forced on the DEPT..........where DO you get this stuff from??? IT was and in fact was used as leverage against Dr. Gassett for other pending Legislation ........Even Tom C. posted that Dr. Gassett told him that, YOU didn't deny it then (again) why do you think you can with me, when you know I watched for your response ( I like the entertainment mainly)........"

IT IS NOT A FACT AND IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE. FIRST, CONELY NEVER CLAIMED THAT GASSETT TOLD HIM THAT THE BILL WAS BEING USED AS LEVERAGE FOR OTHER LEGISLATION, AND GASSETT HAS NEVER EVER SAID THAT HIMSELF. CONELY LIFTED THAT PIECE OF BS FROM SOME ANONYMOUS PERSON (NOT GASSETT) FROM AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT WEBSITE. THAT SOURCE ALSO SAID ALL OF HIS INFORMATION WAS THIRD-HAND AND THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WHETHER ANY OF THE INFORMATION WAS ACCURATE.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> step up source-tell me how other bowhunters are hurt


Crossbows hurt bowhunting because some of those who use crossbows would have become bonafide bowhunters if the xbow option were not available.

Crossbow hunting cannabilizes bowhunting.

Some bowhunters, looking to keep up with the advantaged crossbowers, will switch to crossbows (see VA, were 1/2 of the crossbow hunters were compound hunters switching). 

Once again, Crossbow hunting cannabilizes bowhunting.

You wish to exercise and grow your sport at the expense of mine. You need look no further than OH, where xbows outnumber bows 3:2 and bowhunter growth lags well behind the national average, to understand the negative impact that crossbowers have on real bowhunting.

There is a parasitic relationship between crossbows and real bows, not a synergistic one. To then turn around and claim you are helpful to bowhunting - even pretend or claim you ARE a bowhunter - is ridiculous.


----------



## Jim C

ballard said:


> Wait a second, Jim. The type of discrimination you described deals with primarily immutable characteristics such as age, sex, race, ethnicity, etc., and it applies to people not objects (such as a crossbow).
> 
> Crossbow users do not fall into any protected class. Nobody that hunts with a crossbow doesn't have the option to shoot a gun or a bow or a ML or a pistol if they want to hunt in of those respective seasons.



you missed the point-when people who are against crossbows use disinformation, silly points or outright lies (like the claim that novices with no shooting experience can shoot tighter groups with a crossbow than "top competitive compound archers with releases) its fair to assume that those nonsensical arguments are a PRETEXT for a discriminatory animus

nothing more nothing less


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Crossbows hurt bowhunting because some of those who use crossbows would have become bonafide bowhunters if the xbow option were not available.
> 
> Crossbow hunting cannabilizes bowhunting.


How is hunting, bowhunting or society any different if I choose to use a crossbow rather than my compound, my recurve or my longbow? how is bowhunting impacted if I walk into bass pro and buy a crossbow rather than a compound bow




thesource said:


> Some bowhunters, looking to keep up with the advantaged crossbowers, will switch to crossbows (see VA, were 1/2 of the crossbow hunters were compound hunters switching).
> 
> Once again, Crossbow hunting cannabilizes bowhunting.
> 
> You wish to exercise and grow your sport at the expense of mine. You need look no further than OH, where xbows outnumber bows 3:2 and bowhunter growth lags well behind the national average, to understand the negative impact that crossbowers have on real bowhunting.


this is idiotic-how are you affected by what your neighbor chooses to do. say if your neighbor decides to give up bowhunting to become a bass fisher-are you going to say that cannibalizes bowhunting

its not about you source-you aren't prevented from hunting
there is NO NEGATIVE impact on an objective scale




thesource said:


> There is a parasitic relationship between crossbows and real bows, not a synergistic one. To then turn around and claim you are helpful to bowhunting - even pretend or claim you ARE a bowhunter - is ridiculous.


are compound bows real bows? many trads claim they are not

the parasites are greedy egotists who post this sort of nonsense and think that their own egotistical views of what is bowhunting is more important than free choice and the wishes of others


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> You are welcome to think what ever you want Jim. but the bottom line is you are wrong. And in most states what you want is illegal.



the bottom line is all you have is silly laws based on lies and greed. those are changing. what are you going to do then? you have no rational arguments and more and more states are realizing how lame people like you are when it comes to this issue

I have yet to see you answer a question in a straightforward way

why can't you just admit what we all know


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> How is hunting, bowhunting or society any different if I choose to use a crossbow rather than my compound, my recurve or my longbow? how is bowhunting impacted if I walk into bass pro and buy a crossbow rather than a compound bow


Hunting is helped by your crossbow hunting. 

Bowhunting is negatively impacted because you did not buy a real bow, will not support real bowhunting groups, may not defend bowhunting when it needs you. 

Society is irrelevant, even though you try to make your cause more noble by invoking society at large.....that's a dumb angle.



Jim C said:


> this is idiotic-how are you affected by what your neighbor chooses to do. say if your neighbor decides to give up bowhunting to become a bass fisher-are you going to say that cannibalizes bowhunting


Of course not. Lets stay on track.

If we next allow Muzzleloaders into bowseason, do you think that would be good for crossbow hunting? Or would the legalization of MZ steal some of the vitality from OH's crossbow community? Would that be good for crossbow hunting, from the big picture point of view?

Or don't you really care, since it would be just another choice?



Jim C said:


> its not about you source-you aren't prevented from hunting
> there is NO NEGATIVE impact on an objective scale


You're right, Jim. Its not about me - I have been saying that from my very first post here (which makes you look like a chump.) It is about protecting bowhunting, which is much more important than just little ol' me. 

There are negatives. They may not be fully tangible (yet), or you may refuse to acknowledge them, but there are negatives.



Jim C said:


> are compound bows real bows? many trads claim they are not


Do you need to draw them, hold them, anchor them, aim them, and release them? Yup - I guess they are real.



Jim C said:


> the parasites are greedy egotists who post this sort of nonsense and think that their own egotistical views of what is bowhunting is more important than free choice and the wishes of others


No, Jim. The parasites are those willing to suck the heritage, the tradition, the history, and the life out of bowhunting for a couple dozen FPS and the tactical advantage of not having to draw in the presence of game. To then claim that they are still "bowhunters" is the most obnoxious part.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Hunting is helped by your crossbow hunting.
> 
> Bowhunting is negatively impacted because you did not buy a real bow, will not support real bowhunting groups, may not defend bowhunting when it needs you.
> 
> Society is irrelevant, even though you try to make your cause more noble by invoking society at large.....that's a dumb angle.


most bowhunters don't join any group. some of the leading groups include crossbows. groups like the PBS are anti hunter



.



thesource said:


> If we next allow Muzzleloaders into bowseason, do you think that would be good for crossbow hunting? Or would the legalization of MZ steal some of the vitality from OH's crossbow community? Would that be good for crossbow hunting, from the big picture point of view?
> 
> Or don't you really care, since it would be just another choice?


stupid-this is about kinds of bows-not guns





thesource said:


> You're right, Jim. Its not about me - I have been saying that from my very first post here (which makes you look like a chump.) It is about protecting bowhunting, which is much more important than just little ol' me.
> 
> There are negatives. They may not be fully tangible (yet), or you may refuse to acknowledge them, but there are negatives.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you need to draw them, hold them, anchor them, aim them, and release them? Yup - I guess they are real.
> 
> 
> 
> No, Jim. The parasites are those willing to suck the heritage, the tradition, the history, and the life out of bowhunting for a couple dozen FPS and the tactical advantage of not having to draw in the presence of game. To then claim that they are still "bowhunters" is the most obnoxious part.


more selfish ego nonsense. were compound archers parasites? who owns the bow season source. since you have never hunted with a crossbow your blathering about "tactical advantage" is something you made up


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> stupid-this is about kinds of bows-not guns


I do not consider the crossbow a bow and this is a legitmate question anyway.

I KNEW you would avoid this, and cop out by saying its about guns when it is actually about the impact on one group by another - cannabilization. Usurping.

Answer it, coward.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I do not consider the crossbow a bow and this is a legitmate question anyway.
> 
> I KNEW you would avoid this, and cop out by saying its about guns when it is actually about the impact on one group by another - cannabilization. Usurping.
> 
> Answer it, coward.



sure source-that's why you have 2500 posts on this forum arguing about what another taxpayer wants to use.

the fact is a crossbow was an archery hunting weapon long before there were guns, long before there was a united states and long before the US had a bow season

a four month muzzleloading season would have a deleterious impact on deer hunting

you have admitted that crossbows being used instead of compouds has no deleterious impact on society or the herd.

lets assume (as has the IBO, the NAA, and the NFAA) that a crossbow is a form of archery weapon-a kind of bow

now argue your points


----------



## thesource

Answer the question, stop stalling, please don't be a baby.

Don't hide behind the effect on the herd, answer the question that I asked, coward.

Would the addition of MZ during bowseason have a negative impact on crossbow hunting? Would the addition of another, advantaged choice steal the vitality from the crossbow community?

Don't be scared, Jim - its just a question....answer it.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Jim C said:


> the bottom line is all you have is silly laws based on lies and greed. those are changing. what are you going to do then? you have no rational arguments and more and more states are realizing how lame people like you are when it comes to this issue
> 
> I have yet to see you answer a question in a straightforward way
> 
> why can't you just admit what we all know


You know nothing you just are a biggot towards bowhunting. I have yet to see you answer a question straightfoward.
Tell us why those people you were refering to do not want to spend the time to learn and shoot a compound, tell us why they want to use a crossbow.
Answer what we all know including you


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> You know nothing you just are a biggot towards bowhunting. I have yet to see you answer a question straightfoward.
> Tell us why those people you were refering to do not want to spend the time to learn and shoot a compound, tell us why they want to use a crossbow.
> Answer what we all know including you



thanks for proving my point. I have no duty to justify why some people want to shoot a compound rather than a crossbow or a crossbow rather than a recurve etc

it really doesn't matter to me and it shouldn't matter to you

your claim about me is proof of how little you know

BTW why do you hunt with a compound instead of a barebow-you will find your answer there


----------



## thesource

Jim - still ducking my question?

ANSWER the question.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Jim - still ducking my question?
> 
> ANSWER the question.


why-you have never answered how you are hurt or how bowhunting is hurt by treating xbows like all other bows

rather we get braindead nonsense that a crossbow isn't a bow and other such rot

I noted you don't have the standing here to demand anything of me source

I have always said why xbows should be treated the same as the very similar compound bow

you on the other hand hide behind idiotic claims (they aren't bows etc)

now what question were you spewing source?


----------



## thesource

I answered how bowhunting would be hurt 8 posts back, which leads to my question.

Now stop dodging and ducking and basically acting like a democrat and answer the question on the impact that adding MZ would have on the vitality of crossbows.

Don't be stereotypically LAZY. Go back a page and FIND it....duh.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I answered how bowhunting would be hurt 8 posts back, which leads to my question.
> 
> Now stop dodging and ducking and basically acting like a democrat and answer the question on the impact that adding MZ would have on the vitality of crossbows.
> 
> Don't be stereotypically LAZY. Go back a page and FIND it....duh.



this is an archery discussion source-muzzleloaders are not archery not bows and shoot a different projectile with an explosion. It has nothing to do with bow season and its not a relevant question=I already ANSWERED that a four month MZ season would have a deleterious impact on the herd

If we had a four month mz season lots of compound and crossbow hunters would only use a MZ

that would have a far different effect on the herd than a switch from compounds to crossbows-that impact would have no measurable effect upon the herd

btw your answer was really lame source. you act as if bowhunters all join pro bowhunting groups which is a joke and crossbow hunters wouldn't fight for bow season


----------



## thesource

Did I ask what the effect on the herd would be?

NO.

I asked what the effect on the crossbow community would be.
_
If we next allow Muzzleloaders into bowseason, do you think that would be good for crossbow hunting? Or would the legalization of MZ steal some of the vitality from OH's crossbow community? Would that be good for crossbow hunting, from the big picture point of view?

Or don't you really care, since it would be just another choice?_

You are cowardly refusing to answer.

We all know why you will not answer. You KNOW that MZ would negatively impact crossbow hunting, just as you KNOW that crossbows negatively impact bowhunting.

Your lame and stupid response that MZ are not archery is a worthless bit of misdirection. 70% of AT members responding to a poll on crossbows felt that crossbows were not archery.

If it is that simple - we are all done. 

Answer my questions directly, Jim, or be proven a coward.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Did I ask what the effect on the herd would be?
> 
> NO.
> 
> I asked what the effect on the crossbow community would be.
> _
> If we next allow Muzzleloaders into bowseason, do you think that would be good for crossbow hunting? Or would the legalization of MZ steal some of the vitality from OH's crossbow community? Would that be good for crossbow hunting, from the big picture point of view?
> 
> Or don't you really care, since it would be just another choice?_
> 
> You are cowardly refusing to answer.
> 
> We all know why you will not answer. You KNOW that MZ would negatively impact crossbow hunting, just as you KNOW that crossbows negatively impact bowhunting.
> 
> Your lame and stupid response that MZ are not archery is a worthless bit of misdirection. 70% of AT members responding to a poll on crossbows felt that crossbows were not archery.
> 
> If it is that simple - we are all done.
> 
> Answer my questions directly, Jim, or be proven a coward.


stuff it source-I already answered


70% of an unscientific poll? LOL your polling knowledge is even more pathetic than you lack of crossbow knowldge

crossbows are GOOD for bowhunting


----------



## thesource

What a wimp.

we all know why you won't answer my question.

It proves what we have been saying all along.

Crossbows are good for hunting, may be good for game department budgets, are certainly good for manufacturers like Excalibur that you continuously pimp for, but BAD for bowhunting if allowed during bowseason.

Blows a GIANT hole in the "greedy, elitist" garbage that you spew nonstop.

Pope and Young has it right - crossbows are the biggest threat to bowhunting.

PS - you stuff it, Jim. You just got served.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> What a wimp.
> 
> we all know why you won't answer my question.
> 
> It proves what we have been saying all along.
> 
> Crossbows are good for hunting, may be good for game department budgets, are certainly good for manufacturers like Excalibur that you continuously pimp for, but BAD for bowhunting if allowed during bowseason.
> 
> Blows a GIANT hole in the "greedy, elitist" garbage that you spew nonstop.
> 
> Pope and Young has it right - crossbows are the biggest threat to bowhunting.
> 
> PS - you stuff it, Jim. You just got served.



no source I am about to rub your nose in your lies

go up a few posts

you asked what would happen if MZ's invaded the season

here is what I said


If we had a four month mz season lots of compound and crossbow hunters would only use a MZ

its above =you can try to read it and then you can realize you just made an even bigger fool of yourself

you lose again source-and you will continue to lose every time you butt heads with me


----------



## JavaMan

does this guy have 2500 posts on crossbows?

WOW!

In any States that allow crossbows has their ever been a bonafide detrimental effect?

Mr Source, please don't answer. Your posts are drivel.

Thanks

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

JavaMan said:


> does this guy have 2500 posts on crossbows?
> 
> WOW!
> 
> In any States that allow crossbows has their ever been a bonafide detrimental effect?
> 
> Mr Source, please don't answer. Your posts are drivel.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> JavaMan



there has never been any PROVEN detrimental effect
THe PBS whined that "bowhunters have seen their own season" taken over 

this is a chicken little cry given that xbow archers have never tried to limit trads or compound archers. Ohio's season has not been cut back: the bag limits have not decreased and I can take more deer now than I could twenty years ago


----------



## JavaMan

Jim C said:


> there has never been any PROVEN detrimental effect
> THe PBS whined that "bowhunters have seen their own season" taken over
> 
> this is a chicken little cry given that xbow archers have never tried to limit trads or compound archers. Ohio's season has not been cut back: the bag limits have not decreased and I can take more deer now than I could twenty years ago



thanks JimC. I certainly have never heard a detrimental effect in WY or GA. If there is no detrimental effect then I see no reason for it not being allowed. From what I sense, I see an increased intrest in crossbowhunting. I take a look at the Easton Archery catalog and they have arrows. I see increased articles in hunting magazines.

I am certainly not going to give up my compound for a crossbow but I certainly would not be opposed to adding this type of a bow as an additional challenge.

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

JavaMan said:


> does this guy have 2500 posts on crossbows?
> 
> WOW!
> 
> In any States that allow crossbows has their ever been a bonafide detrimental effect?
> 
> Mr Source, please don't answer. Your posts are drivel.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> JavaMan


Looks like Doug is back to recieve a record 8th banning. Enjoy it while it lasts.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> there has never been any PROVEN detrimental effect
> THe PBS whined that "bowhunters have seen their own season" taken over


I think most would consider bowhunter growth stagnation to be a detrimental effect in OH.

Unless, of course, you are pimping crossbows.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> no source I am about to rub your nose in your lies
> 
> go up a few posts
> 
> you asked what would happen if MZ's invaded the season
> 
> here is what I said
> 
> 
> If we had a four month mz season lots of compound and crossbow hunters would only use a MZ
> 
> its above =you can try to read it and then you can realize you just made an even bigger fool of yourself
> 
> you lose again source-and you will continue to lose every time you butt heads with me


No - you still haven't answered my question.

I did not ask "what would happen if MZ's invaded the season?"

I asked:


thesource said:


> If we next allow Muzzleloaders into bowseason, do you think that would be good for crossbow hunting? *Or would the legalization of MZ steal some of the vitality from OH's crossbow community? *Would that be good for crossbow hunting, from the big picture point of view?


You CONTINUE to make a fool of yourself by evading the question. 

I even clarified it for you here:


thesource said:


> Did I ask what the effect on the herd would be?
> NO.
> *I asked what the effect on the crossbow community would be*.


ANSWER THE QUESTION.

Stop hiding behind the skirts of biological impact and answer the question as it was written, you chicken.


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> Wait a second, Jim. The type of discrimination you described deals with primarily immutable characteristics such as age, sex, race, ethnicity, etc., and it applies to people not objects (such as a crossbow).
> 
> Crossbow users do not fall into any protected class. Nobody that hunts with a crossbow doesn't have the option to shoot a gun or a bow or a ML or a pistol if they want to hunt in of those respective seasons.


That is exactly what montana and alaska told these guys. Suck it up, you can still hunt.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I have NO clue about what you're trying to ask here......WE got an expansion in the end, that is the fact of the matter, despite the tactics used to insure we would not......


DUH you aid it was illegal and dirty. looks like you lied once again. They just figured a a way around you. 

I a second note, I find it sad that you are UN AMERICAN in the way you chastise your legislature. first you say KDFW did nothing wronf by sole sourceing Cornell for a survey. you keep saying its their money and they can spend it teh way the want( which is wrong of course). Our governemnet does nto work that way.. Its called checks and balances. Thats the way it works. If you don;t like well. you can join your canadian memebers up north.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> REally? When exactly was the law "repealed" to need reinstating?
> 
> 
> Except ONE was a Statute, the other a Reg.......therin lies the problems..and that's NOT how seasons should EVER be set, it's a Ky law issue and not a "social issue"......which is why many on both sides fought against it, whether you believe it or care doesn't change the facts.......so are you always so happy for other's suffering???
> 
> To defend stupid actions for stupid reasons is ___________ ......'nuff said on that



Guess yoru dense or something...Whats wrong with that? thats how it works. you don;t like it, you change it. Seems pretty simple. whats the hang up? The legislature felt the department was worng and they did what they could to fix the problem. Sounds like responsible government. I appears your just whining because you did not get your full blown season. I guess you feel the government has no business in wildlife?


----------



## Marvin

JavaMan said:


> thanks JimC. I certainly have never heard a detrimental effect in WY or GA. If there is no detrimental effect then I see no reason for it not being allowed. From what I sense, I see an increased intrest in crossbowhunting. I take a look at the Easton Archery catalog and they have arrows. I see increased articles in hunting magazines.
> 
> I am certainly not going to give up my compound for a crossbow but I certainly would not be opposed to adding this type of a bow as an additional challenge.
> 
> JavaMan


High doug. You have quite a few other handles that need axed too.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I think most would consider bowhunter growth stagnation to be a detrimental effect in OH.
> 
> Unless, of course, you are pimping crossbows.



are you pimping bigotry and hatred of other hunters SOurce? there is no evidence (using logic that is) that xbows have caused any stagnation in ohio.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> No - you still haven't answered my question.
> 
> I did not ask "what would happen if MZ's invaded the season?"
> 
> I asked:
> 
> 
> You CONTINUE to make a fool of yourself by evading the question.
> 
> I even clarified it for you here:
> 
> 
> ANSWER THE QUESTION.
> 
> Stop hiding behind the skirts of biological impact and answer the question as it was written, you chicken.


you have never directly answered a question/ I guess again you are unable to think clearly since I gave you the obvious answer and you just don't have the tools to analyze the obvious point-the vast majority of people who bowhunt-with any kind of bow do so because of the longer seasons and the ability to hunt in areas where firearms are prohibited. If Muskets were treated exactly the same as archery weapons you would see a large number of people abandoning xbows, compound bows and yes, trad bows.



now we have proven that xbows won't hurt the herd
we have proven-through your admissions that xbows won't hurt society

all that is left is your personal mental issues involving your status

in other words-all you have to prevent others from exercising a non-harmful choice is that it bothers you

pretty pathetic


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> That is exactly what montana and alaska told these guys. Suck it up, you can still hunt.



cute but the fact remains they had no rational argument to exclude people.
Its fun seeing compound hunters happy with this when such an attitude could have been easily applied to compound bows


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> cute but the fact remains they had no rational argument to exclude people.
> Its fun seeing compound hunters happy with this when such an attitude could have been easily applied to compound bows


If it could have then they would have. Thats how I see it. Form and function are identical and I believe that the courts would see it that way too. crossbow does not make this cut.


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> If it could have then they would have. Thats how I see it. Form and function are identical and I believe that the courts would see it that way too. crossbow does not make this cut.


the problem of relying on a court that may have been influenced by politics, disinformation or lies is that if the court changes its ruling (happens all the time) you are left without an argument. judges who are elected on issues where the law is not clear cut or not developed tend to go with the votes 

there is a lot of intellectual dishonesty on your side of the ledger marvin-I noticed you didn't try-to your credit-to justify the putrid nonsense the PBS was spewing about absolute novices outshooting top competitive compound archers or that a 300 FPS crossbow shoots "at almost twice the speed" as most compound bows

maybe that was the sort of "evidence" in court


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> the problem of relying on a court that may have been influenced by politics, disinformation or lies is that if the court changes its ruling (happens all the time) you are left without an argument. judges who are elected on issues where the law is not clear cut or not developed tend to go with the votes
> 
> there is a lot of intellectual dishonesty on your side of the ledger marvin-I noticed you didn't try-to your credit-to justify the putrid nonsense the PBS was spewing about absolute novices outshooting top competitive compound archers or that a 300 FPS crossbow shoots "at almost twice the speed" as most compound bows
> 
> maybe that was the sort of "evidence" in court


I do not see the statements made by PBS as any truths (especially now). Mearly a soap box rant( there is a lot of that going on then and now from both sides). Seems they probably got caught up in the heat of it. Passionate people do that at times. ( evidence in this very thread) That was a very difficult time in bowhunting history. Things were pretty tense and irrational from both sides. I have not read the full report to my discredit and I am mearly speaking on my feelings at the time and my conversations with a lot of people who were into it neck deep on this issue.


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> the problem of relying on a court that may have been influenced by politics, disinformation or lies is that if the court changes its ruling (happens all the time) you are left without an argument. judges who are elected on issues where the law is not clear cut or not developed tend to go with the votes
> 
> there is a lot of intellectual dishonesty on your side of the ledger marvin-I noticed you didn't try-to your credit-to justify the putrid nonsense the PBS was spewing about absolute novices outshooting top competitive compound archers or that a 300 FPS crossbow shoots "at almost twice the speed" as most compound bows
> 
> maybe that was the sort of "evidence" in court



I also agree with you on the court system. Thats why it is a social issue to say the least. We rely on non hunting judges to depict what happens in our arena. Thats why its important to have a healthy perception of hunting. its best not to speculate on what was presented in court. it might be an ugly find for both sides involved


----------



## Free Range

> cute but the fact remains they had no rational argument to exclude people.
> Its fun seeing compound hunters happy with this when such an attitude could have been easily applied to compound bows


Again Jim you are completely wrong, as wrong as you can be, because nobody is excluded, nobody. Only a weapon type, just as Pistols, Muzzle loaders, rifles and shot guns, and in many states Spears, Atal Atal, stone arrowheads, etc. Your cry of bigotry is funny at best, and ridiculous at it’s worst. So now we are applying human rights on objects, kind of what PETA does with animals isn’t it?


----------



## Marvin

Free Range said:


> Again Jim you are completely wrong, as wrong as you can be, because nobody is excluded, nobody. Only a weapon type, just as Pistols, Muzzle loaders, rifles and shot guns, and in many states Spears, Atal Atal, stone arrowheads, etc. Your cry of bigotry is funny at best, and ridiculous at it’s worst. So now we are applying human rights on objects, kind of what PETA does with animals isn’t it?


here it is Free Range
Anthropomorphism, a form of personification (applying human or animal qualities to inanimate objects)


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Again Jim you are completely wrong, as wrong as you can be, because nobody is excluded, nobody. Only a weapon type, just as Pistols, Muzzle loaders, rifles and shot guns, and in many states Spears, Atal Atal, stone arrowheads, etc. Your cry of bigotry is funny at best, and ridiculous at it’s worst. So now we are applying human rights on objects, kind of what PETA does with animals isn’t it?



more semantic based stupidity

can you actually formulate a rational reason as to why a crossbow should be treated differently than a compound bow other than the fact you don't want more people hunting in bow season?


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Ace - Wait a second there, big fella.
> 
> A. SB 211 had the backing of most of the House and Senate leaders.
> 
> HAD being the "key word" there; "something" ......"changed that", and most agreed that happened right that very day........some may even have " a clue" what that could have been....bottome line it was withdrawn, "odd" for a bill with the "backing" you're claiming, TOO many admitted they wanted NO part in doing the job of the KDFWR for that to "sell".....and I assure you I'm not alone on these beliefs far from it in fact, plus WE have enough of that in writing to confirm it as fact
> 
> B. It came out of the AG committee in plenty of time to pass, and your suggestions to the contrary are patently false. If memory serves, it passed out of the AG committee 9 for and 2 against. It was already on the Senate floor ready to be voted upon when the "compromise" occurred. We had plenty of backing to bring it out of the Senate. It was returned to the Ag committee at the sponsoring Senator's request.
> 
> That's "true", just as it's also true it COULD have been voted on for over a week, but wasn't........time was "running out" and it was Never voted on..........a matter of public record no less, I watched it daily, (and posted daily reports on ky hunting, every single day it could have been voted on but wasn't added to the "time factor" anyone can see this
> 
> C. We had several leaders in the House who were also going to back this bill. Rob Wilkey was going to sponsor it in the House.
> 
> That's "far" from being a "sure thing"
> 
> D. You've "heard" that Gov. Fletcher was going to veto it? Yeah, which website did you read that on?
> 
> I won't tell you that, but it was NOT on any website, I (again) don't post nearly everything I know; just as you've stated you don't
> 
> Btw it would have been against HIS best interest to "go along" with those who circumvent the process; that he is in fact the head of .....I'd still have bet on that.....as many more would
> 
> E. The House bill filed by Meeks was going nowhere, ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE. You don't know what you're talking about, and I was in Frankfort enough to know what's truth and what's fiction.
> 
> Bully for you, was it or wasn't it "Reported Favorably"?? Keep in mind, I also followed it daily and have the proof.....I NEVER tried to support either bill, because as you know full well, I'm against involving them (the legislature) in seasons, limits etc. (unlike some)
> 
> F. You made this comment: "I said that it was forced on the DEPT..........where DO you get this stuff from??? IT was and in fact was used as leverage against Dr. Gassett for other pending Legislation ........Even Tom C. posted that Dr. Gassett told him that, YOU didn't deny it then (again) why do you think you can with me, when you know I watched for your response ( I like the entertainment mainly)........"
> 
> IT IS NOT A FACT AND IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE. FIRST, CONELY NEVER CLAIMED THAT GASSETT TOLD HIM THAT THE BILL WAS BEING USED AS LEVERAGE FOR OTHER LEGISLATION, AND GASSETT HAS NEVER EVER SAID THAT HIMSELF. CONELY LIFTED THAT PIECE OF BS FROM SOME ANONYMOUS PERSON (NOT GASSETT) FROM AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT WEBSITE. THAT SOURCE ALSO SAID ALL OF HIS INFORMATION WAS THIRD-HAND AND THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WHETHER ANY OF THE INFORMATION WAS ACCURATE.


You'd better go back and read some posts YES Tom did say that, maybe you missed it, which would explain why you didn't comment???? 

It is absurd for you to even "think" that you started "playing politics" with sb 211 (and even admit your part in that, as if bragging even) then try to maintain "politics" were NOT being used(leverage), Any of us who've been "around" this stuff for any length of time KNOW that every little thing can easily be tied together whenever this stuff starts......always been that way, likley that won't change......

On the KDFWR 's website they had the bills they 1.) strongly support, 2. support , 3.) Oppose..........IF you think NONE Of these bills were used as "leverage" (that in and of itself would be "news") that's very entertaining at least......but I'm not "buying it"......

I'd guess "some" of this is now "specualtion" on either side, but some of that can be based on Ky Politics "as usual".....most seem to think
BTW, how about working together in the future???


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> DUH you aid it was illegal and dirty. looks like you lied once again. They just figured a a way around you.
> 
> I a second note, I find it sad that you are UN AMERICAN in the way you chastise your legislature. first you say KDFW did nothing wronf by sole sourceing Cornell for a survey. you keep saying its their money and they can spend it teh way the want( which is wrong of course). Our governemnet does nto work that way.. Its called checks and balances. Thats the way it works. If you don;t like well. you can join your canadian memebers up north.


Again absurd and false......."our" KDFWR DOES work that way,(and they have "checks and balances " that have been working for decades btw).. they have several very good lawyers, for YOU to accuse them of law breaking (and not even being a Ky lawyer) proves once again, you're "spin' on the fact is all you have, and you don't require them to make any sense or be 2% accurate even.......as usual you are incorrect.....

If YOu don't like it go to Russia, seems your ideas "fit right in " with theirs, for example the end justifies the means.......Hand it to the majority so long as WE get what we want, now THAT sounds "Un-American" to me.....

BTW we don't have any "Canaidan memembership" as you've been told repeated times, JD Miller has settled that just for you and source.......


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Guess yoru dense or something...Whats wrong with that? thats how it works. you don;t like it, you change it. Seems pretty simple. whats the hang up?
> 
> *The legislature felt the department was worng and they did what they could to fix the problem. *
> 
> Not accurate once again, first Ballard and co ran to them to try to make a point, it's never been established that the point was made, it certainly never became law.....
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like responsible government. I appears your just whining because you did not get your full blown season. I guess you feel the government has no business in wildlife?


Not "whining" and no reason for me to be, WE got much more than we'd offered to "end this mess", We only had 5 of 9 votes , at first WE ended up with a unanimous vote......IOW THEY lost the four votes they had, NO reason for ME (or US) to whine, thier tactics did not work, easy to see, glad you think it's "responsible government" since anyone can see, WE didn't get the 10 days "set in stone" that was being fought for.....and make no mistake they had some "big guns" fighting for this, Ballard, the radio talk show host, the UBK (both of the latter two had Support SB 211 on thier respective web sites with contact information even after the bill was withdrawn......)

As usual, you're incorrect on what did and didn't occur, no big deal, we're all used to that by now from you


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> the vast majority of people who bowhunt-with any kind of bow do so because of the longer seasons and the ability to hunt in areas where firearms are prohibited. If Muskets were treated exactly the same as archery weapons you would see a large number of people abandoning xbows, compound bows and yes, trad bows.


Exactly. Hunters would abandon their crossbows (and bows, too, I imagine) to hunt with the more advantaged weapon. That would clearly be BAD for crossbow hunting, and that would clearly be BAD for bowhunting, even though on an individual level it may not have the same impact...YOU would be free to choose to continue to hunt with an xbow, to paraphrase your oft repeated talking point.

Its amazing that you can see how adding MZ would threaten the vitality of crossbow hunting, but will not admit that the exact same effect happens to bowhunting when crossbows are introduced into bowseasons.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Again absurd and false......."our" KDFWR DOES work that way,(and they have "checks and balances " that have been working for decades btw).. they have several very good lawyers, for YOU to accuse them of law breaking (and not even being a Ky lawyer) proves once again, you're "spin' on the fact is all you have, and you don't require them to make any sense or be 2% accurate even.......as usual you are incorrect.....
> 
> If YOu don't like it go to Russia, seems your ideas "fit right in " with theirs, for example the end justifies the means.......Hand it to the majority so long as WE get what we want, now THAT sounds "Un-American" to me.....
> 
> BTW we don't have any "Canaidan memembership" as you've been told repeated times, JD Miller has settled that just for you and source.......



Hey your othe one that said they did something illegal not me buster. I just stated they figured out away to fix a broken wheel. No they do not work that way bud, your on crack if you think they do. Russia has demoprcratic elections Ace...sorry if you do not like that either. Your are the WORST liar I have ever seen with a keyboard. The library should suspend your privledges. Funn when teh shoe is on the other foot you squeal. Look at New York. Their wildlife boys say out with the crossbow and you guys are baying about how wrong it is. So what is this nuclear option you keep whining about ace? HCR 13?


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Not "whining" and no reason for me to be, WE got much more than we'd offered to "end this mess", We only had 5 of 9 votes , at first WE ended up with a unanimous vote......IOW THEY lost the four votes they had, NO reason for ME (or US) to whine, thier tactics did not work, easy to see, glad you think it's "responsible government" since anyone can see, WE didn't get the 10 days "set in stone" that was being fought for.....and make no mistake they had some "big guns" fighting for this, Ballard, the radio talk show host, the UBK (both of the latter two had Support SB 211 on thier respective web sites with contact information even after the bill was withdrawn......)
> 
> As usual, you're incorrect on what did and didn't occur, no big deal, we're all used to that by now from you


You ended up with unanimous vote because people believed the second survey was an honest one. Looks like others were convinced other wise the second time and other felt sorry for you. Big guns? Ballard? Seems like a good person in my exchanges with him. radio talk show host versus a major corporation...HHMMMMM interesting. Talk about big guns. Looks like Ballard went out to motivate the troops( that what responsible sportsmen do). Sounds like what your supposed to do if you feel like your getting bent over. Thats what the NRA, SCI and others do. i guess you will bad mouth them for that tactic too.


----------



## aceoky

JavaMan said:


> a crossbow is a bow. I am still waiting for someone to tell me what happened before and after in Kentucky. It's hard to muddle through all the posts.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> JavaMan


Short version(at least for me)

The KDFWR expanded the crossbow season to run the same as archery season, based upon requests from hunters and having done research for over five years which proved the resources would NOT be in any danger from this action...

Some didnt' like this so they RAN to the Legislature, stating they didn't know or realize the meeting where this became fact would do such( despite the fact those very same people had debated the whole thing on Kyhunting and bowsite for only two examples of the fact they did in fact know exactly what was taking place)

WE(the pro-side of the expansion issue) worked for many months to try to reach a compromise we (both sides) could "live with", but were always told "NO you'll get NOTHING, now and in the future", in part because they wanted to see the Cornell survey results which they "thought" would help their side, it didn't and WE are all out $70,000+ just to find out what most already know, that IS , most Ky deer and turkey hunters are gun hunters and do not care what is or isn't legal archery equip for that season, to expect anything else is not really considering the facts, nonetheless, survey was done and supported expansion, another vote is taken this time unanimous, FOR full expansion (the same season once already stolen) Also in part (as Ballard's post proves because ONE of the NINE sitting commisioners in anger made a "threat" over this BS.......they refused OUR every attempt at a fair and just compromise, knowing full well, WE had nothing to do with it, and it takes a "few more" than one commisioner to do anything anyway.....AT any rate, for many reasons they refused ANY and ALL compromise attemtps made by the pro-side,then suddenly when it was "obvious" we just might get the whole thing(unless sb211 passed which MANY (and on both sides) still think was far from "certain" (what in politics is "certain" unless it has already taken place??)

Might have sb211 passed certainly.......but "might" is NOT a "done deal" by any means, again, politicians "trade bills" all of the time, it's NO secret and thus nothing is ever a "done deal" before it's passed.....I think most know this fact..

The original vote was 5-4 in favor of the expanded season, in March 2005 by Dec 2005 the last vote was unanimous FOR full expansion, faced with that fact they ran to the Legislature once again with Sb 211 which really ONLY changed the existing cb season from a Reg to a Statute (thus an obvious attempt to *circumvent and undermine *the authority of the KDFWR).... a "compromise" was reached and sb211 was withdrawn NEVER making it to any vote in either the Senate or the House......

All of how it took place and when is posted here for all to see, this is the "condensed version"....while accurate leaves out some details of the tactics used, etc.etc.etc. 

HERE is the season that resulted from that "compromise"(which btw NO one from the PRO side of the issue was notified about taking place, which proves no "good faith" was ever intended nor was the real reason for it taking place imho

2006-07 Kentucky Hunting Seasons

DEER 
Modern Gun Zones 1-2 Nov. 11-26, 2006 
Zones 3-4 Nov. 11-20, 2006 
Archery Statewide Sept. 2, 2006 - Jan. 15, 2007
*Crossbow Statewide Oct. 1-22 and 
Nov. 11 - Dec. 31, 2006*Youth Only Firearms Statewide Oct. 14-15, 2006
Muzzleloader Statewide Oct. 21-22 and Dec. 9-17, 2006
Free Youth Weekend* Statewide Dec. 30-31, 2006
*During the Free Youth Deer Hunting Weekend ONLY, hunters ages 15 and under may hunt deer with a firearm without a license or deer permit, if accompanied by an adult. (See elsewhere for county zones, harvest restrictions and hunter requirements for each zone.)
ELK
Zone At-Large Quota Hunts:
Antlered Elk, firearms Oct. 7-13, 2006
Antlerless Elk, firearms Dec. 9-22, 2006
Either Sex Elk, archery Oct. 7, 2006 - Jan. 15, 2007
Limited Entry Area Quota Hunts:
Antlered Elk, firearms Oct. 7-13, 2006
Antlerless Elk, firearms Dec. 9-15, 2006
Legal deer hunters who possess an elk application permit may take elk from any county NOT included in the elk restoration zone following deer season and equipment regulations. 
TURKEY 
Fall Archery Sept. 2, 2006 - Jan. 15, 2007
*Fall Crossbow Oct. 1-22 and Nov. 11 - Dec. 31, 2006 *Fall Shotgun Oct. 28 - Nov. 3 and Dec. 2-8, 2006
Spring Youth Only April 7-8, 2007
Spring April 14 - May 6, 2007
SQUIRREL 
Fall Aug. 19 - Nov. 10 and Nov. 13, 2006 - Feb. 28, 2007
Spring June 2 - 15, 2007
CROW 
Sept. 1 - Nov. 7, 2006 and Jan. 4 - Feb. 28, 2007
OTTER
Noon Nov. 13, 2006 - noon Feb. 28, 2007
Check the KDFWR website at fw.ky.gov or call 1-800-858-1549 for current regulations regarding river otter harvest zone.
BOBCAT Open statewide 
Noon Nov. 13, 2006 - Jan. 31, 2007
COYOTE, WILD HOG & GROUNDHOG 
Open statewide and year-round. 
COYOTE TRAPPING 
Noon Nov. 13, 2006 - noon Feb. 28, 2007
RABBIT & QUAIL 
Nov. 13, 2006 - Feb. 10, 2007, in the following counties: Allen, Ballard, Butler, Caldwell, Calloway, Carlisle, Christian, Crittenden, Daviess, Fulton, Graves, Hancock, Henderson, Hickman, Hopkins, Livingston, Logan, Lyon, Marshall, McLean, McCracken, Muhlenberg, Ohio, Simpson, Todd, Trigg, Union, Warren and Webster.
Nov. 1-10 and Nov. 13, 2006 - Jan. 31, 2007 in all other counties.
GROUSE 
Nov. 13, 2006 - Feb. 28, 2007 in the following counties only: Adair, Bath, Bell, Boyd, Bracken, Breathitt, Campbell, Carter, Clark, Clay, Clinton, Cumberland, Elliott, Estill, Fleming, Floyd, Garrard, Greenup, Harlan, Harrison, Jackson, Johnson, Knott, Knox, Laurel, Lawrence, Lee, Leslie, Letcher, Lewis, Lincoln, Madison, Magoffin, Martin, Mason, McCreary, Menifee, Montgomery, Morgan, Nicholas, Owsley, Pendleton, Perry, Pike, Powell, Pulaski, Robertson, Rockcastle, Rowan, Russell, Wayne, Whitley and Wolfe. 
RACCOON & OPOSSUM HUNTING
Nov. 1, 2006 - noon Feb. 28, 2007; hunting only at night during Modern Gun Deer Season.
RACCOON & OPOSSUM TRAPPING
Noon Nov. 13, 2006 - noon Feb. 28, 2007
MUSKRAT, MINK, BEAVER, RED FOX, GRAY FOX, WEASEL & STRIPED SKUNK HUNTING/ TRAPPING 
Noon Nov. 13, 2006 - noon Feb. 28, 2007
FREE YOUTH SMALL GAME 
HUNTING & TRAPPING WEEK 
Dec. 30, 2006 - Jan. 5, 2007


NOTE: Seasons on Wildlife Management Areas & other public hunting lands not managed by the KDFWR may be different from those above. Please check individual area listings for WMAs. 

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

Also in Ky, anytime "guns" are legal, (modern or ML) crossbows are also allowed, and the Draw Lock is also legal whenever the crossbow is in KY....


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> DUH you aid it was illegal and dirty. looks like you lied once again. They just figured a a way around you.
> 
> POST up where I ever said it was "illegal", YOU made a point out of my saying "not that I'm aware of " but that doesn't make it right" NOW YOU want to say I said it was illegal........that's funny
> 
> I a second note, I find it sad that you are UN AMERICAN in the way you chastise your legislature. first you say KDFW did nothing wronf by sole sourceing Cornell for a survey. you keep saying its their money and they can spend it teh way the want( which is wrong of course). Our governemnet does nto work that way.. Its called checks and balances. Thats the way it works. If you don;t like well. you can join your canadian memebers up north.



Your "spin" is showing even more than usual......


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Exactly. Hunters would abandon their crossbows (and bows, too, I imagine) to hunt with the more advantaged weapon. That would clearly be BAD for crossbow hunting, and that would clearly be BAD for bowhunting, even though on an individual level it may not have the same impact...YOU would be free to choose to continue to hunt with an xbow, to paraphrase your oft repeated talking point.
> 
> Its amazing that you can see how adding MZ would threaten the vitality of crossbow hunting, but will not admit that the exact same effect happens to bowhunting when crossbows are introduced into bowseasons.



gee source-this is again stupid

crossbows are not advantaged in terms of range, power, accuracy etc compared to a compound bow. you rpactice a few weeks with a compound you can shoot with any crossbow archer.

You practice hard for months-you will be able to outshoot most crossbow archers

there isn't an archer alive who can hang with a good muzzleloader
I watched a tape of my late friend-Marnie McCausland (former national BP rifle champion) drop a big running boar at 80+Meters with a TC muzzleloader

she shot a 275 pound deer in the Shawnee State Forrest at close to 150 yards.



muskets are more powerful more accurate, kill by shock (you shoot a deer in the shoulder with a musket-it drops-you shoot one there with a bow it runs and runs and runs and runs in many cases), has a trajectory that makes branches overhead and 10 yard distance errors irrelevant etc

substituting one type of bow for another has no impact on archery hunting-just as compounds almost completely wiped out trad bows in the early and mid 70's

replacing all kinds of bows with firearms is much different

even a 5 year old could understand that


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Your "spin" is showing even more than usual......


Tell us ACE, If Mr. GAssett gets the axe and an anti-crossbow person gets in there...Where you gonna turn? Checks and balances ace, checks and balances. Undermine my rear end.....


----------



## doctariAFC

and the beat goes on.....

Crossbows do not hurt hunters or bowhunting. This has been proven through the many years of many states legalizing this implement. In fact, States like Georgia and Tennessee, recently adding crossbows, have seen this move to be a modest growth tool, adding to the ranks of bowhunters.

Crossbows accomplish the return of older hunters returning to archery season because they can once again bowhunt.

Women find the crossbow appealing because it is less physically demanding to operate for them

Ditto for kids.

The facts backing up these statements have been well-publicized, and all the doom and gloom coming from the anti-crossbow side holds ZERO legitimacy.

Those are the facts. The herds do not suffer, archery season participation stabilizes, but does not show the feared "orange army" invading the woods. The list of positives is long, while the list of negatives is non-existent. We're not speaking of objections, we're speaking of proven results, and spouting a negative that does not come to pass at all makes the "negative" non-existent.

Further, allowing the use of a crossbow during part or all of early archery season adds dollars to the cash starved Conservation Funds in every State which has legalized them. The increase not only comes from newcomers or returning older hunters, but also from existing bowhunters interested in another challenge. Many enthusiast hunters capitalize on the use of varying implements to add challenges and to capitalize on longer seasons. Even within singular seasons, such as archery or regular, ehtusiasts will employ a recurve one day, a compound the next, a crossbow the next, depending on hunting scenario for that day. Ditto in regular season. A shotgun couled be used one day, a rifle the next, a black powder the next, then even a handgun the following day. With the amount of Conservation Funds being driven by the enthusiast hunter, as we spend more than any other group of hunter, the addition of the crossbow makes great sense for hunters, for hunting, for the herds, for the Conservation Fund, for introducing young hunters, women hunters, etc.

Again, the facts supporting all of this have been published ad nauseum. Denial of these facts without bringing other facts to the table in defense of the anti-position underscores the complete and utter baseless fears spewed by the anti group.

You can gripe all all you want. Accuse and defame. But, until we see some facts from the anti-side which cement your positions as being valid, all we hear is nonsense, baseless baloney and further divisions through factionista thinking which hurts hunting as a whole.

Firearms ought never be permitted during early archery season. I believe the vast majority of bowhunters, both vertical and horizontal alike agree on this one. Too many States have permitted crossbows for too long, without an intrusion into archery season of firearms to make this observation very valid. Firearms intrusion into early archery also needs not a presence of crossbows to be attempted. Just look at 2004 and NYS proposal to ADD black powder into the middle of early archery season. No mention of crossbows in that move. It was through the efforts of many hunting groups (not only NYB, but the Federations) that put the kibosh on ML in early archery in NYS. Most of the opposition actually came from firearms hunters, believing this to be a safety issue concerning line of sight.

Until we can move past the petty personal baloney and base our actions on facts, the division will only continue, sadly perpetuated by both sides of the debate. Bring facts and debate the merit of crossbows based on the facts.... If you do not have command of the facts, exercise the learning process and get educated onto them, and ask questions. You will get enlightened...


----------



## Marvin

*Here you go ace...*



aceoky said:


> Please feel free to post anything , whatever you wish......at least *I* have a "stake" in what happens, in Kentucky, unlike YOU "instigating" non-stop, including as you "brag" about giving the opposition the idea, of a 70/30 split season.......I only hope that when something YOU believe in and fight for comes up, that YOU don't face such BS from other hunters, and I actually mean that, NO good comes from this type of behavior.....
> 
> *No matter we gained the respect of most all in Ky by playing by the established rules, which they did not*, and in the end, as suspected they will be the reason of their own demise......which is btw very fitting in my view....:cocktail:
> 
> Also be sure to post all the discussions after your ban, from doing exactly what I stated above! THAT should prove, quite a few things, want to continue to speak of glass houses, Tim??
> 
> Whatever YOU try to do, you can't change the facts of what happened, give it up! (word to the wise )
> 
> The "bow clubs" are the first ones to turn this into a "fight", and caused 100% of the division, because they were and are unwilling to share.....YOU (and a few others) may not like that fact, it's still a fact regardless.....
> 
> WE only came into being, to give a "level playing field" , because the "bow groups", said "there is no club or org , which want this, so we must therefore be right, in that no one really wants this, where is their support?".......WE have shown the support, and had our delegate votes count in the LKS convention(a big deal in KY).........all of the other accusations mean squat, just as there is and has been NO proof of anything the "pro-side" has been accused of......
> 
> Also FR since YOU like bringing up so much what I post, why not admit, how I predicted the results of the second survey, AND they would mirror the first one(you know the one you keep trying to say was "close"??) I am 100% aware of what was and is going on here, I'd bet it means much more to me than you........glass houses.......get real please.....
> 
> YOU only caused more division, and as here only are interested in trying to argue, got you "kicked" from there more than once, so now it's permanent.......must be because your "facts" were so well done?? It WAS because of your constant trying to argue, disputing EVERY fact, regardless of where it came, from, JUST exactly as you have here so often said the first survey was "close", it's obvious to everyone, it wasn't OR the KDFWR would have NOT went forward with the expansion, so rather than to insist on trying to argue, how about YOU present relevent facts and real data, that support YOUR views, instead of trying to "trash" everyone else's ideas, or what was posted a year ago, or anything else, that you can attempt to do to cause problems, rather focus on data, and facts....
> 
> See, that would be a good discussion......NO reason to get so personal, and as you admitted get into a pi$$ing match with me every chance you get, dispute(if you can) what I post with relevent facts, not opinions, as I always try to do......
> 
> I will promise you though, IF you insist on "pulling up old threads", I can do the same, we'll show everyone what part YOU played in "Unity"....I'd suggest you keep the personal crap out of this from this point on.....


Guess who is the liar here...


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> You ended up with unanimous vote because people believed the second survey was an honest one.
> 
> Because it was an honest one, not a hard concept to grasp, nothing has ever been proven to date to disprove it either and certainly not from a lack of trying and checking it for about a year now....
> 
> 
> Looks like others were convinced other wise the second time and other felt sorry for you. Big guns? Ballard? Seems like a good person in my exchanges with him.
> I would have to agree with that
> 
> 
> 
> radio talk show host versus a major corporation...
> 
> Nice *unfounded* accusation, post up any proof of ANY major corporation fighting for this, again it was the HUNTERS of Ky who asked for this, IF you have proof of what you just posted I have no doubts many would be very interested in seeing it (myself included) as someone who's been involved and vocal, I don't think you can back that up, others have tried the same tactic, but as usual, with NO proof, let's see your PROOF.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HHMMMMM interesting. Talk about big guns. Looks like Ballard went out to motivate the troops( that what responsible sportsmen do).
> 
> Maybe, but there were "better ways" and certainly "less risky" ways of doing so, why use dangerous tactics over a "social issue"??? NOT the best move, and many agree with me on that (from both sides even)
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds like what your supposed to do if you feel like your getting bent over.
> 
> MORE absurd spin! NO one was "ever bent over", and in fact WE tried to work with them to avoid all of this, THEY refused, get your "facts" straight.......oh yeah, you don't live here, so YOU don't care about the risks this has "opened" (though you love to use the "Pandora's box" when it doesn't even fit you spin, when it' s a fact you dismiss it as "what you're supposed to do"......yeah right
> 
> 
> Thats what the NRA, SCI and others do. i guess you will bad mouth them for that tactic too.



Nope......


----------



## Jim C

Good post doc-there is an old saying-those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it-or in this case-get flogged by the facts


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Nope......


Tell us Ace, how many people is enough to represent the true voice of kentucky sportsmen and women. lets get a number out here.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Guess who is the liar here...



MORE personal attacks with NO proof.....typical, 

And the tactics used by the desperate when they have NO facts or anything else on their side.....

Dispute this, it WAS passed, the season was established, (and printed), only after all of that did THEY RUN to the legislature, to stop it.......AFTER small businesses had stocked up and were selling crossbows, Oh I guess THAT (not to mention the hunters who bought them ) were not unhappy and that didn't cause any of this division........  

Again IF that had effected/affected YOUR family, would YOU be so quick to call others (who were involved unlike yourself, at the time) "a liar" OR would YOU be glad the truth is being told, and just maybe others might learn and NOT have to lose so much?????


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Nope......


Please ACE tell us the risks....If you cannto your just *LYING*


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> MORE personal attacks with NO proof.....typical,
> 
> And the tactics used by the desperate when they have NO facts or anything else on their side.....
> 
> Dispute this, it WAS passed, the season was established, (and printed), only after all of that did THEY RUN to the legislature, to stop it.......AFTER small businesses had stocked up and were selling crossbows, Oh I guess THAT (not to mention the hunters who bought them ) were not unhappy and that didn't cause any of this division........
> 
> Again IF that had effected/affected YOUR family, would YOU be so quick to call others (who were involved unlike yourself, at the time) "a liar" OR would YOU be glad the truth is being told, and just maybe others might learn and NOT have to lose so much?????



I hear whining. Tell us ace who would you run to if Mr gasett gets the axe and THE SOURCE gets put into the lead role?


----------



## doctariAFC

Jim C said:


> Good post doc-there is an old saying-those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it-or in this case-get flogged by the facts


Ain't that the truth! And the more time passes, and the more younger generations come up, the more important learning history becomes. A classic example of this very real need to learn and understand the history of modern hunting (from the turn of the 20th century through today) is found in Farbman's brainchild known as the WHA. He obviously has zero understanding of the history of hunting, otherwise his nonsensical notion would never have been promulgated.

A command of the facts is certainly lost in anti-crossbow arguments. And, yes, history does indeed repeat itself. JUst look at the history of each specific hunting season to find out that truth.


----------



## Marvin

doctariAFC said:


> Ain't that the truth! And the more time passes, and the more younger generations come up, the more important learning history becomes. A classic example of this very real need to learn and understand the history of modern hunting (from the turn of the 20th century through today) is found in Farbman's brainchild known as the WHA. He obviously has zero understanding of the history of hunting, otherwise his nonsensical notion would never have been promulgated.
> 
> A command of the facts is certainly lost in anti-crossbow arguments. And, yes, history does indeed repeat itself. JUst look at the history of each specific hunting season to find out that truth.


I think more importantly, it needs to be known HOW that history was written. Were getting a classic example of it here. People and Game departments are at odds now more than ever. Cannot say I blame them.


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> and the beat goes on.....
> 
> Crossbows do not hurt hunters or bowhunting. This has been proven through the many years of many states legalizing this implement. In fact, States like Georgia and Tennessee, recently adding crossbows, have seen this move to be a modest growth tool, adding to the ranks of bowhunters....


Crossbows do hurt bowhunting, as withnessed in OH where crossbow hunters outnumber bowhunters by3:2 (and growing) while new bowhunter recruitment lags far behind the national average. I think that is bad for bowhunting.

Looking at 1 or 2 year old crossbow data does not tell the whole story.



doctariAFC said:


> Crossbows accomplish the return of older hunters returning to archery season because they can once again bowhunt. Women find the crossbow appealing because it is less physically demanding to operate for them. Ditto for kids...


No problem - legislate crossbows for the aging, women, and kids. We ALL know that is not a significant number, though. Almost everyone I have heard from has no issue with allowing crossbows for these groups.


I won't argue with the fact that selling crossbow permits adds to Conservation Funds....but it does not require a bowseasaon takeover to do that, and it is not fair to throw bowhunting under the bus just to boost your beloved Conservation Fund.

In closing, there are legitimate facts on both sides. Just because you refuse to accept them does not mean they are not factual. The OH crossbow/bowhunter numbers are a fact, for example, as is the fact that the harvest rate for crossbows in VA was higher than that of bowhunters. You refuse to admit they are facts, however, and keep buffaloing your own opinions.

A little objectivity goes a long way - and you have proven repeatedly that you cannot be objective with regards to this and many other topics.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Tell us Ace, how many people is enough to represent the true voice of kentucky sportsmen and women. lets get a number out here.


Not MY area of "expertise" (nor anyone else who's posted I'll bet), thus I'll accept the Cornell survey, since it IS their area of expertise, and they have the very fine reputation on doing surveys, I believe it's "best" to let those with the experiece, education, and reputation do their jobs without much interference (such as Wildlife Bilogists setting seasons and limits based upon what they KNOW , rather than "arm chair biologists" tryiing to do it, then when the arm chair crowd IS wrong, whom can we blame other than ourselves for NOT allowing the properly trained to make such important decisions)

Some seem to think to decide the outcome of the Presidential elections (for example) that a "random exit" poll couldn't work (to relate to the Cornell survey) but those who understand statistics far better than I do , or likely ever will KNOW better than you have to poll(or survey near everyone to reach a valid conclusion)....

SO, I will take the expert's word on all of that, some won't and I have no problem with that , but when some start making unfounded accuasations with no proof, that helps no one, on either side, and as it now stands the facts are the Survey stands, as is the stance of the KDFWR


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> Crossbows do hurt bowhunting, as withnessed in OH where crossbow hunters outnumber bowhunters by3:2 (and growing) while new bowhunter recruitment lags far behind the national average. I think that is bad for bowhunting.
> 
> Looking at 1 or 2 year old crossbow data does not tell the whole story.
> 
> 
> 
> No problem - legislate crossbows for the aging, women, and kids. We ALL know that is not a significant number, though. Almost everyone I have heard from has no issue with allowing crossbows for these groups.
> 
> 
> I won't argue with the fact that selling crossbow permits adds to Conservation Funds....but it does not require a bowseasaon takeover to do that, and it is not fair to throw bowhunting under the bus just to boost your beloved Conservation Fund.
> 
> In closing, there are legitimate facts on both sides. Just because you refuse to accept them does not mean they are not factual. The OH crossbow/bowhunter numbers are a fact, for example, as is the fact that the harvest rate for crossbows in VA was higher than that of bowhunters. You refuse to admit they are facts, however, and keep buffaloing your own opinions.
> 
> A little objectivity goes a long way - and you have proven repeatedly that you cannot be objective with regards to this and many other topics.



Source they don't realize that when you project that VA difference to a large crossbow crowd like ohio, it gets UGLY. they don;t want you to see taht part of it. There were several minions baying like coyotes about how teh introduction of the crossbow did not effect states like viginia. they Love the fledgling data not the full blown data.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Some seem to think to decide the outcome of the Presidential elections (for example) that a "random exit" poll couldn't work (to relate to the Cornell survey) but those who understand statistics far better than I do , or likely ever will KNOW better than you have to poll(or survey near everyone to reach a valid conclusion)....



Oops.

In case you forgot, Einstien, the exit polling of the last 2 presidential elections was WAY off the mark and caused huge controversy. 

Better use another example ..... duh.


----------



## thesource

Marvin said:


> Source they don't realize that when you project that VA difference to a large crossbow crowd like ohio, it gets UGLY. they don;t want you to see taht part of it. There were several minions baying like coyotes about how teh introduction of the crossbow did not effect states like viginia. they Love the fledgling data not the full blown data.


Your right, of course.

I particularly like it when they use WY for any kind of comparison.

Wy has a grand total of 1600 "archers" (bow and crossbow.)

We have more bowhunters than that in my township.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Not MY area of "expertise" (nor anyone else who's posted I'll bet), thus I'll accept the Cornell survey, since it IS their area of expertise, and they have the very fine reputation on doing surveys, I believe it's "best" to let those with the experiece, education, and reputation do their jobs without much interference (such as Wildlife Bilogists setting seasons and limits based upon what they KNOW , rather than "arm chair biologists" tryiing to do it, then when the arm chair crowd IS wrong, whom can we blame other than ourselves for NOT allowing the properly trained to make such important decisions)
> 
> Some seem to think to decide the outcome of the Presidential elections (for example) that a "random exit" poll couldn't work (to relate to the Cornell survey) but those who understand statistics far better than I do , or likely ever will KNOW better than you have to poll(or survey near everyone to reach a valid conclusion)....
> 
> SO, I will take the expert's word on all of that, some won't and I have no problem with that , but when some start making unfounded accuasations with no proof, that helps no one, on either side, and as it now stands the facts are the Survey stands, as is the stance of the KDFWR



Loosk like like your state legislature thinks you wrong on trusting the experts. Source beat me to it I see on the presidential elections. Tell us Ace What are you going to do if it gets over turned? Who are you going to run to to fight it? ( i kno wthe answer and your gonna cop out like JIm does at times and say "it aint going to ever happen so i am nto going to answer")


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> Your right, of course.
> 
> I particularly like it when they use WY for any kind of comparison.
> 
> Wy has a grand total of 1600 "archers" (bow and crossbow.)
> 
> We have more bowhunters than that in my township.


Yep ..see no effect... They love this stuff.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Please ACE tell us the risks....If you cannto your just *LYING*


ONLY in YOUR opinion, the "risks" are well known, now if YOU think it's a "good idea" to EVER put seasons "in stone",(hard for anyone on either side to change IF need be)..... then I guess in your opinion that's "OK", and you're entitiled to that stance (or would be IF you lived in KY, which you don't therefore your opinion carries NO relevent weight, since after all none of it affects/effects YOU in any way)..

Those of us who , A.) are affected/effected, B.) have seen the present system work so well, in the fact of the Deer population explosion, the ELk, and the Wild Turkey's "comeback", (to only mention a few) happen to know when a system is working this well, it' s neither "broken" nor "needs fixing".......and WE live here and care, unlike you who doesn't on either count, and don't have your "facts" even close to accurate, (but then again, IF they were , they wouldn't serve to help you at all, or in the least)...

Good for me, YOUR opinion of me, or the rest of it, means less than nothing (negative impact) on my stance or feelings......Move to Ky, let's see then how you go about condoning things that were best left "alone" , and DO then affect/effect you , then it just might matter as it is now, it doesn't.....


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Crossbows do hurt bowhunting, as withnessed in OH where crossbow hunters outnumber bowhunters by3:2 (and growing) while new bowhunter recruitment lags far behind the national average. I think that is bad for bowhunting.
> 
> Looking at 1 or 2 year old crossbow data does not tell the whole story.


Psychobabble. they are all bowhunters. Compounds outnumber trads-that hasn't hurt trads



N


thesource said:


> o problem - legislate crossbows for the aging, women, and kids. We ALL know that is not a significant number, though. Almost everyone I have heard from has no issue with allowing crossbows for these groups.
> 
> 
> I won't argue with the fact that selling crossbow permits adds to Conservation Funds....but it does not require a bowseasaon takeover to do that, and it is not fair to throw bowhunting under the bus just to boost your beloved Conservation Fund.
> 
> In closing, there are legitimate facts on both sides. Just because you refuse to accept them does not mean they are not factual. The OH crossbow/bowhunter numbers are a fact, for example, as is the fact that the harvest rate for crossbows in VA was higher than that of bowhunters. You refuse to admit they are facts, however, and keep buffaloing your own opinions.
> 
> A little objectivity goes a long way - and you have proven repeatedly that you cannot be objective with regards to this and many other topics.



what legitimate facts are on your side? spewing nonsense that xbows hurt bowhunting? LOL-you have no facts source


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> ONLY in YOUR opinion, the "risks" are well known, now if YOU think it's a "good idea" to EVER put seasons "in stone",(hard for anyone on either side to change IF need be)..... then I guess in your opinion that's "OK", and you're entitiled to that stance (or would be IF you lived in KY, which you don't therefore your opinion carries NO relevent weight, since after all none of it affects/effects YOU in any way)..
> 
> Those of us who , A.) are affected/effected, B.) have seen the present system work so well, in the fact of the Deer population explosion, the ELk, and the Wild Turkey's "comeback", (to only mention a few) happen to know when a system is working this well, it' s neither "broken" nor "needs fixing".......and WE live here and care, unlike you who doesn't on either count, and don't have your "facts" even close to accurate, (but then again, IF they were , they wouldn't serve to help you at all, or in the least)...
> 
> Good for me, YOUR opinion of me, or the rest of it, means less than nothing (negative impact) on my stance or feelings......Move to Ky, let's see then how you go about condoning things that were best left "alone" , and DO then affect/effect you , then it just might matter as it is now, it doesn't.....



You keep baying about NOT wanting the governemnet to get into setting laws Yet it seems MR MEEks was all for it. 



A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION *urging *an extension of the *crossbow-hunting season* for whitetail deer and wild turkey.
WHEREAS, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources has studied extensively the issue of extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey; and
WHEREAS, the department has proposed extending the two crossbow seasons from the historic ten-day framework to coincide with the regular archery season; and
WHEREAS, there is a recognized need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large portion of the state; and
WHEREAS, extending the crossbow-hunting season would not adversely endanger the wild turkey population in the state; and
WHEREAS, a Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources survey found that more than half of respondents surveyed support expansion of the deer and turkey crossbow-hunting seasons; and
WHEREAS, organizations like the Crossbow Advisory Panel and the League of Kentucky Sportsmen deserve recognition for their support and active involvement in this important issue;
NOW, THEREFORE,
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Senate concurring therein:

Section 1. The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky urges the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission and the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources to proceed with extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and turkey.
Section 2. Copies of this Resolution shall be transmitted to Mr. Jon Gassett, commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, and to each member of the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission.

Looks like the government was butting in ACE. Now whats your excuse? Checks and balances remember....


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Compounds outnumber trads-that hasn't hurt trads





Jim C said:


> compounds almost completely wiped out trad bows in the early and mid 70's


Which side of your face should we believe?


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Oops.
> 
> In case you forgot, Einstien, the exit polling of the last 2 presidential elections was WAY off the mark and caused huge controversy.
> 
> Better use another example ..... duh.


Depends.......

Plus (even IF anyone believes that)......Two out of "several" others that were "spot on", the FACT is the "average" proves they work, dispute it "Einstein" if you'd like, desperate tactics by desperate people.....bet they continue to do them and use them.......btw, that was ONLY one example, fact is there is NO need to ever poll/survey, even most, so long as the people polled/surveyed are random AND come from every district.......a well known fact you can only try to dispute, facts however (as usual) will and have proven the concept works......and has for far longer than most (if not all) of US have been alive......

HAD they waited for the Western part of Florida's exit poll results rather than claimiing Florida, with polls STILL OPEN, out there, it would have been different(again, ALL areas must be represented in Ky that means each of the NINE districts, they were in fact......) , too many apples to skyscraper comparisons taking place imho

Another fact: none of us here have the creditials of Cornell, to attempt to speak about them , only proves again, what lengths some will go to......to try to "win" on such trivial matters (to most, who don't care and certainly don't know what the "big deal " of allowing another archery weapon during an open archery season is/was ever all about)........


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> You keep baying about NOT wanting the governemnet to get into setting laws Yet it seems MR MEEks was all for it.
> 
> 
> 
> A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION *urging *an extension of the *crossbow-hunting season* for whitetail deer and wild turkey.
> WHEREAS, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources *has studied extensively *the issue of extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey; and
> 
> WHEREAS, the department has proposed extending the two crossbow seasons from the historic ten-day framework to coincide with the regular archery season; andWHEREAS, there is a recognized need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large portion of the state; and
> WHEREAS, extending the crossbow-hunting season would not adversely endanger the wild turkey population in the state; and
> 
> 
> WHEREAS, a Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources *survey found that more than half of respondents surveyed support expansion of the deer and turkey crossbow-hunting seasons; and*
> 
> WHEREAS, organizations like the *Crossbow Advisory Panel and the League of Kentucky Sportsmen *deserve recognition for *their support and active involvement *in this important issue;
> NOW, THEREFORE,
> Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Senate concurring therein:
> 
> Section 1. The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky *urges *the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission and the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources to proceed with extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and turkey.
> Section 2. Copies of this Resolution shall be transmitted to Mr. Jon Gassett, commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, and to each member of the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission.
> 
> Looks like the government was butting in ACE. Now whats your excuse? Checks and balances remember....


I'd already posted that,(in full right here in this very thread) first and do you honestly NOT understand the difference in "urges" and trying to set seasons "in stone", IF so, then I'm wasting my time answering you........ 

THAT and SB 211 are as different in reality as "night and day" are........ PLUS a HUGE difference in URGING the DEPT to "go forward" with what they're supposed to do and trying to undermine and circumvent that .......and most can easily see the differences.....and why ONE is "very dangerous" while ONE actually is trying to maintain things as they have been NOT change the entire system (again which MOST agree with and appreciate what's been accomplished in OUR lifetime, that we seen first hand)..... 

Apples to skyscrapers comparison, at best.......

Seasons are set the way they are for a reason..... anyone trying to change that for the worse , is risking everything (not to mention opening YOUR "Pandora's box" for others to later use , and many think that IS exactly what was accomplished by this tactic being used,)........


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Depends.......
> 
> Plus (even IF anyone believes that)......Two out of "several" others that were "spot on", the FACT is the "average" proves they work, dispute it "Einstein" if you'd like, desperate tactics by desperate people.....bet they continue to do them and use them.......btw, that was ONLY one example, fact is there is NO need to ever poll/survey, even most, so long as the people polled/surveyed are random AND come from every district.......a well known fact you can only try to dispute, facts however (as usual) will and have proven the concept works......and has for far longer than most (if not all) of US have been alive......
> 
> Another fact: none of us here have the creditials of Cornell, to attempt to speak about them , only proves again, what lengths some will go to......to try to "win" on such trivial matters (to most, who don't care and certainly don't know what the "big deal " of allowing another archery weapon during an open archery season is/was ever all about)........



So are we to take it that if a senator or house or rep wanted to introduce a bill that was "for the protection of hunting rights and seasons" you would be against it?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Which side of your face should we believe?



poor source-the compound craze was rampant and caused a decrease in trad hunters when numerous people bought the new compound bows in the early 70's. but now there are probably more trads then ever as many compound archers-people who never would have started archery but for compounds, bought trad bows after years of compound hunting.

archery hunting remains no matter what type of bow is used

you still don't have any facts on your side source. that's why to fixate on bs like calling a crossbow not a bow or claiming crossbow hunters aren't bowhunters


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Loosk like like your state legislature thinks you wrong on trusting the experts. Source beat me to it I see on the presidential elections. Tell us Ace What are you going to do if it gets over turned? Who are you going to run to to fight it? ( i kno wthe answer and your gonna cop out like JIm does at times and say "it aint going to ever happen so i am nto going to answer")



That's both funny and odd, exactly what(which) law(s) did THEY pass to prove that true??? More misinformation.......as expected.......WE (and that includes the experts btw got expansion) your spin won't ever change that......Dr. Gassett(a Wildlife Biologist no less) being replaced by source,......

THAT is the "biggest reach" I've seen yet, and THAT is saying a great deal......

I guess though IF you're going to dream........."dream big", it certainly doesn't cost any more.......

BTW; still waiting on some actual/factual PROOF of the "big corporations" fighting for expansion........where is it Marvin????? YOU stated it as fact......


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> So are we to take it that if a senator or house or rep wanted to introduce a bill that was "for the protection of hunting rights and seasons" you would be against it?



NOT enough "information" there to answer, things ARE done much differntly in KY than you are aware, that much is obvious........I'm AGAINST the legislature making, setting or otherwise trying to establish seasons, limits or anything related, it IS the job of the KDFWR who do so without ANY GF $$$..... THEY should be allowed to do the job set aside for THEM without any interference from the Legislature (and many, many from both the House and Senate agreed(in writing) with me on that very stance.......


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> Loosk like like your state legislature thinks you wrong on trusting the experts. Source beat me to it I see on the presidential elections. Tell us Ace What are you going to do if it gets over turned? Who are you going to run to to fight it? ( i kno wthe answer and your gonna cop out like JIm does at times and say "it aint going to ever happen so i am nto going to answer")


my arguments have nothing to do with politicians other than noting that more and more states are throwing off the chains of bigotry as more and more data proves that the sky is falling nonsense of the PBS etc is complete bull poop. I have answered honestly, something most of the anti xbow crowd rarely does. 

right now, as Doc noted, there is no evidence that xbows have had a deleterious affect on any season and the paranoia in KY is based on unfounded speculation covering for greed and a sense of entitlement


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> poor source-the compound craze was rampant and caused a decrease in trad hunters when numerous people bought the new compound bows in the early 70's.
> 
> but now there are probably more trads then ever as many compound archers-people who never would have started archery but for compounds, bought trad bows after years of compound hunting.
> 
> Yet another fact and part of history they don't want to be shown, since it proves the "big picture" IS what is important......it just doesn't fit their "agenda" so they try to dismiss it, and don't want it to become known
> 
> archery hunting remains no matter what type of bow is used
> 
> Same as above, even though the exact same things were done as is being done now, first to include the compound, now it's the crossbow's turn.....just as the compound was good for bowhunting , in the end, so will the crossbow's inclusion be, then they are sunk.....the truth and facts will prove they were wrong......just as they did on the compound's inclusion 30+ years ago
> 
> you still don't have any facts on your side source. that's why to fixate on bs like calling a crossbow not a bow or claiming crossbow hunters aren't bowhunters



Which is why they all resort to personal attacks (such as using LIAR, "lazy" etc.etc. ) so often, it's the "best" they can do.....not much agreed, but it IS all they have


----------



## Fortancient

*I live in Ky*

and I dont own a crossbow, but I do not have a problem with them hunting in bow season however. 

I do not agree with everything the the DFWR does however.


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> my arguments have nothing to do with politicians other than noting that more and more states are throwing off the chains of bigotry as more and more data proves that the sky is falling nonsense of the PBS etc is complete bull poop. I have answered honestly, something most of the anti xbow crowd rarely does.
> 
> right now, as Doc noted, there is no evidence that xbows have had a deleterious affect on any season *and the paranoia in KY is based on unfounded speculation covering for greed and a sense of entitlement*


I think that "sums it up" rather well, and anyone who's bothered to read and learn what HAS taken place in Ky should have by now realized , many serious mistakes were made, and there is much to be learned from them for the future, not only in regards to this one non-issue either.......sometimes it's wise and prudent to "pick your fights" and NOT use "overkill tactics" on such matters.........it certainly didn't work this time, not really much more to add on my part in this.........

I've at least tried to prove what really has taken place, what motivated both sides, the tactics that were used,and the "end results" of all of these......some may try to "spin" the facts, they are though facts, and stand alone......with or without anyone's input......MOST (if not all) of these are in fact a matter of Pulblic Record........so anyone can easily check to see they are in fact honest and truth........despite the "spin" and misinformation......in fact there are tapes of the Strader Radio show, where those present misrepresented the FACTS , in order to gain support for SB 211......very easy to prove the entire show was A.) based on false information B.) done soley to garner support for SB 211 and using that aforementioned misrepresentations.....(plural btw)...Just as the Host of the show , kept "Support SB 211" on the site for some time after it was withdrawn (may be still there for all I know, not being a "supporter" of him nor his "tactics" , but one would expect such a self-proclaimed "Authority on Hunting and Fishing in KY" to KNOW what his shows are about and what is said is true, in this case "the ball WAS dropped" on that end, and I think he is just as responsible as anyone else, who appeared on that show.....

THE REGS had been in fact filed more than a month before that show "aired" the misinformation, among other things they weren't and wouldn't be before the KY Legislature left for the session.........BIG mistake, and a matter of record.......many know this , more are learning about it, in the "end" it served NO real or good purpose and to my knowledge and belief has yet to be "retracted" THAT is the way things have been done throughout this whole "mess"......condone it IF you will, it wasn't "right" imho, to mislead anyone to support anything based upon false information........much , much less using a Radio Talk Show to "get exactly that done".........IF it were an "honest mistake"(hey we all make those) , then it should have been "retracted" the very next week, since Our side made it well known, of when the Regs were in fact filed (with the link no less)...........NO excuse for that, nor for it never being retracted, in PUBLIC.......

That is not the only time such tactics were used either.......all to circumvent and change the existing (read working very well) system.........because some didn't like the fact Two surveys, Two votes didn't either go "their way".........sometimes it's best to do things for the "good of all", rather than risk everything, for such issues.........some didn't grasp that concept, I hope they now do........in the end , the expansion happened, and more than some offers WE made............think about that fact

How then was any risk in the end worth it?? I honestly don't pretend to understand that.......only that only the future will tell, how badly WE have all been affected/effected in KY by those very dangerous tactics that have in fact been used......


----------



## aceoky

Fortancient said:


> and I dont own a crossbow, but I do not have a problem with them hunting in bow season however.
> 
> I do not agree with everything the the DFWR does however.


Thank you!

Most feel exactly the same way as you've stated!

Good post (and most don't agree with everything they do) with about 1.5 million to "answer to", that IS a "tall order " for anyone or any group to think they could..........NOT gonna happen, but when you actually think back at the time when a DEER TRACK was " major news" and NOW look at our deer herds, it's a bit hard to dispute what good they've accomplished??

Same for the Turkey and ELk as well.......


----------



## ballard

Ace - Here was my original post:

"F. You made this comment: "I said that it was forced on the DEPT..........where DO you get this stuff from??? IT was and in fact was used as leverage against Dr. Gassett for other pending Legislation ........Even Tom C. posted that Dr. Gassett told him that, YOU didn't deny it then (again) why do you think you can with me, when you know I watched for your response ( I like the entertainment mainly)........"

IT IS NOT A FACT AND IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE. FIRST, CONELY NEVER CLAIMED THAT GASSETT TOLD HIM THAT THE BILL WAS BEING USED AS LEVERAGE FOR OTHER LEGISLATION, AND GASSETT HAS NEVER EVER SAID THAT HIMSELF. CONELY LIFTED THAT PIECE OF BS FROM SOME ANONYMOUS PERSON (NOT GASSETT) FROM AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT WEBSITE. THAT SOURCE ALSO SAID ALL OF HIS INFORMATION WAS THIRD-HAND AND THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WHETHER ANY OF THE INFORMATION WAS ACCURATE."

Here was your response. . . .



aceoky said:


> You'd better go back and read some posts YES Tom did say that, maybe you missed it, which would explain why you didn't comment????


Here's the link to the thread where Conely made this allegation. . . .

http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/showthread.php?t=26834

You guys can read it for yourself. . . .

Nowhere (and I repeat NOWHERE) does anyone ever allege that Dr. Gassett told Conely that SB 211 was being used to hold other pending legislation "hostage". Conely's wild claim was originally made in Post #5 and then cited his source at #10. To continue to make such a claim misrepresents not only reality, but also totally misrepresents what was actually said by 3rd parties about what happened.

Moreover, you also suggested that I tacitly agreed with your fictitious assessment when you made this false claim: "YOU [meaning me] didn't deny it then (again)". (A) Conely never said that Dr. Gassett told him that; (B) I directly denied that SB 211 was being used to leverage any other legislation (see post #21) and (C) In the underlying thread where Conely picked up this wrong information, the anonymous source of that false allegation clearly stated that he didn't know the truth. 

Please stop saying that it "was and is fact" that SB 211 was being used to hold other pending legislation hostage. To continue to state that this is a "fact" is deceitful, unfounded and misleading.


----------



## aceoky

Ballard, fine, MY mistake.........agreed, I missed that, and the part of the "other forum" , however Tom did say that SB 211 WAS being used as "leverage" didn't he??? I waited for YOUR response (and missed it as well), I have no problem admitting an honest mistake btw, I think you know that to be true.......IF there was NO pressure on the KDFWR to compromise, then, wonder why Dr. Gassett was called by them to compromise.......???

Let's 'face it " without sb 211 passing Both the House and Senate *and* the Gov signiing it, FULL expansion would have occured......Dr. Gassett would need a good reason to exchange that reality for any "compromise"???

BTW YOU weren't there that day either, thus you can't know what was or wasn't said by anyone.....correct? funny that even Co states on thier forum that WAS being done, but you acted as if I'd "made it up out of thin air", thanks for at least proving *I* was NOT the source of that........I appreciate it very much......as a point of interest, it's still being said by several in the Dept and those also who have spoken with those present, fwiw........could be there IS some truth to it??? 

That however in NO way changes any of the rest of it..... and

YOU didn't answer either of my other questions:

Was sb 211 drafted for that sole purpose thus making any vote not a "priortity", .......(the entire question is in another post of mine btw)

AND.......are YOU willing to work with US< (Tom, Myself JD Terry etc OR others) on future issues, such as for example on trying to use the additional P-R funds to aquire More Public Land??? (I'm sure there are other issues as well WE can all work on together IF you are willing)......Are you??


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I'd already posted that,(in full right here in this very thread) first and do you honestly NOT understand the difference in "urges" and trying to set seasons "in stone", IF so, then I'm wasting my time answering you........
> 
> THAT and SB 211 are as different in reality as "night and day" are........ PLUS a HUGE difference in URGING the DEPT to "go forward" with what they're supposed to do and trying to undermine and circumvent that .......and most can easily see the differences.....and why ONE is "very dangerous" while ONE actually is trying to maintain things as they have been NOT change the entire system (again which MOST agree with and appreciate what's been accomplished in OUR lifetime, that we seen first hand).....
> 
> Apples to skyscrapers comparison, at best.......
> 
> Seasons are set the way they are for a reason..... anyone trying to change that for the worse , is risking everything (not to mention opening YOUR "Pandora's box" for others to later use , and many think that IS exactly what was accomplished by this tactic being used,)........



we had mandatory voluntary summer football practice too. I've heard the squeals. they are all the same. Some want their cake and eat it too.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> That's both funny and odd, exactly what(which) law(s) did THEY pass to prove that true??? More misinformation.......as expected.......WE (and that includes the experts btw got expansion) your spin won't ever change that......Dr. Gassett(a Wildlife Biologist no less) being replaced by source,......
> 
> THAT is the "biggest reach" I've seen yet, and THAT is saying a great deal......
> 
> I guess though IF you're going to dream........."dream big", it certainly doesn't cost any more.......
> 
> BTW; still waiting on some actual/factual PROOF of the "big corporations" fighting for expansion........where is it Marvin????? YOU stated it as fact......


Hey slipknot, its a question not a statement. Your supposed to answer it ( your hardest task by far)


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I think that "sums it up" rather well, and anyone who's bothered to read and learn what HAS taken place in Ky should have by now realized , many serious mistakes were made, and there is much to be learned from them for the future, not only in regards to this one non-issue either.......sometimes it's wise and prudent to "pick your fights" and NOT use "overkill tactics" on such matters.........it certainly didn't work this time, not really much more to add on my part in this.........
> 
> 30 pages for a NON-issue?
> 
> I've at least tried to prove what really has taken place, what motivated both sides, the tactics that were used,and the "end results" of all of these......some may try to "spin" the facts, they are though facts( easily supportable [/COLOR]( don't mind that snickering in the background), and stand alone......with or without anyone's input......MOST (if not all) of these are in fact a matter of Pulblic Record........so anyone can easily check to see they are in fact honest and truth........despite the "spin" and misinformation......in fact there are tapes of the Strader Radio show, where those present misrepresented the FACTS , in order to gain support for SB 211......very easy to prove the entire show was A.) based on false information B.) done soley to garner support for SB 211 and using that aforementioned misrepresentations.....(plural btw)...Just as the Host of the show , kept "Support SB 211" on the site for some time after it was withdrawn (may be still there for all I know, not being a "supporter" of him nor his "tactics" , but one would expect such a self-proclaimed "Authority on Hunting and Fishing in KY" to KNOW what his shows are about and what is said is true, in this case "the ball WAS dropped" on that end, and I think he is just as responsible as anyone else, who appeared on that show.....
> 
> THE REGS had been in fact filed more than a month before that show "aired" the misinformation, among other things they weren't and wouldn't be before the KY Legislature left for the session.........BIG mistake, and a matter of record.......many know this , more are learning about it, in the "end" it served NO real or good purpose and to my knowledge and belief has yet to be "retracted" THAT is the way things have been done throughout this whole "mess"......condone it IF you will, it wasn't "right" imho, to mislead anyone to support anything based upon false information........much , much less using a Radio Talk Show to "get exactly that done".........IF it were an "honest mistake"(hey we all make those) , then it should have been "retracted" the very next week, since Our side made it well known, of when the Regs were in fact filed (with the link no less)...........NO excuse for that, nor for it never being retracted, in PUBLIC.......
> 
> That is not the only time such tactics were used either.......all to circumvent and change the existing (read working very well) system.........because some didn't like the fact Two surveys, Two votes didn't either go "their way".........sometimes it's best to do things for the "good of all", rather than risk everything, for such issues.........some didn't grasp that concept, I hope they now do........in the end , the expansion happened, and more than some offers WE made............think about that fact
> Still don't see the risks. Tell us more about the **** season issue
> How then was any risk in the end worth it?? I honestly don't pretend to understand that.......only that only the future will tell, how badly WE have all been affected/effected in KY by those very dangerous tactics that have in fact been used......



Yes ace. please instruct everyone NOt to use teh law to their advantage. if you get it in the rear and do not believe your game departments to be on the up and up then you just have to roll over and enjoy it is what he is saying. Keep 30 people happy out of several thousand. 

don;t worry abou the manufacturers payouts ace. it took several years for them to surface in ohio as they will likely do in Kentucky. we will watch you 401K like a hawk.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Yes ace. please instruct everyone NOt to use teh law to their advantage. if you get it in the rear and do not believe your game departments to be on the up and up then you just have to roll over and enjoy it is what he is saying.
> 
> Keep 30 people happy out of several thousand.
> 
> Again more "NEW math"? or just more of the same ole same.....there were MANY more for this than the combined total membership of the two clubs that fought it, it's all there for all to see. in the Cornell survey......once more unfounded accusations and not relevent(or truthful) "spin".......nothing new from you though
> 
> So much for that.....
> 
> don;t worry abou the manufacturers payouts ace. it took several years for them to surface in ohio as they will likely do in Kentucky. we will watch you 401K like a hawk.


Oh....NOW we have to "wait" NOT hardly what YOU stated just above is it now???? I won't call YOU names though......:cocktail: :darkbeer:

NO need to wait, it's been made(the accusation ) here (in KY) before, but NO one has provided any evidence, (again not for lack of trying) it just hasn't happened, at least that anyone on either side is aware of.........period

YES Marvin it WAS a "non-issue" some made it otherwise, and foolislly imho, and just because YOu don't see nor understand the risks(and it's doubtful you're trying to since yet again they affect/effect you in no way whatever), that does not mean they're not real , they are, most who care about things in Ky are very well aware of that fact as well.

Like already stated there just isn't much left for me to add; please everyone take note of the facts presented,and try to avoid them if possible, the "infighting" and "divisions" this has cost are obvious and avoidable, IF one learns from the mistakes made and posted herein.....

You continue to make the false claim, I'm getting some kind of compensation out of this.....please refrain, it's not true and not helping anyone on either side I've already answered you on what "I'm getting out of this".........so no good reason for you to continue with the misinformation.......I know you can't prove otherwise, it's impossible to show something that doesn't exist.....


----------



## Free Range

Doc as always well stated, I don’t agree of course. 



> Crossbows accomplish the return of older hunters returning to archery season because they can once again bowhunt.


Well, we can look at this 2 ways, did it accomplish the return of hunters, or did it accomplish the return of any hunter? I guess it your goal is to accomplish even one hunters return then we can call it a big success. But if the goal is to bring back measurable numbers then all the “Data, and Facts” do not support this as happening, and hand full here and there maybe, but enough to justify what has happen in the last year or so? I don’t think so. 



> Women find the crossbow appealing because it is less physically demanding to operate for them
> 
> Ditto for kids.


I bet they might find a shotgun appealing for the same reasons. And again where is the data to support more then isolated cases? There is none, and as Source as pointed out, IF, that is the goal then there is more then one way to skin that cat, a separate season and or exemption for those user groups.



> Those are the facts. The herds do not suffer


Is that the only factor in hunting, heard control?



> archery season participation stabilizes, but does not show the feared "orange army" invading the woods


Not sure about this one, the only long running data we have for Eastern states, is Ohio, and yes I would say the orange army did take over there. As for the rest, the numbers don’t look promising. Ohio took how many years to get where they are? The increases in the “new” states are light years ahead of Ohio, they could over run bowhunters in five years at the current growth. 



> Further, allowing the use of a crossbow during part or all of early archery season adds dollars to the cash starved Conservation Funds in every State which has legalized them.


I haven’t looked this up yet, but I understand that most states that allow them don’t make people buy a different license to use a xb as opposed to using a bow. And has it really, did anyone provide the numbers proving this yet, if so I haven’t seen them, so to take a page out of your book, just the facts please. 



> You can gripe all all you want. Accuse and defame. But, until we see some facts from the anti-side which cement your positions as being valid, all we hear is nonsense, baseless baloney and further divisions through factionista thinking which hurts hunting as a whole.


Like it or not, my position is based on Tradition, Bowhunting, and a reward system based on work and effort, very little of my position is based on what “you” would call facts, although some of it is and those facts have been brought forth. Those positions are just as valid, as heard control and adding money to the coffers of another government agency.


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> YOU didn't answer either of my other questions:
> 
> Was sb 211 drafted for that sole purpose thus making any vote not a "priortity", .......(the entire question is in another post of mine btw)
> 
> AND.......are YOU willing to work with US< (Tom, Myself JD Terry etc OR others) on future issues, such as for example on trying to use the additional P-R funds to aquire More Public Land??? (I'm sure there are other issues as well WE can all work on together IF you are willing)......Are you??


*SB 211 drafted for sole purpose*: Ace, this thread is too long for me to go back and re-read everything, but I assume that you're asking whether SB 211 was promulgated to force a compromise? If that is the question, then the answer is "No." It was drafted with the intent of becoming law. We were more than ready and willing to take our chances with the legislature and the Governor. This issue was NEVER EVER linked to any other legislation or with the belief that a compromise would ensue. The meeting that led to the "compromise" was actually called by Sec'y of Commerce Ward (not the Senators or Governor or anybody else) as a last minute attempt to work out a solution that everybody could live with.
*
Future Issues*: Yes, I'm all in favor of working with others in future cases. I harbor no resentment towards anyone over the xbow issue, and I'm not sure why you'd think I'm not willing to work in a cooperative fashion. 

My opinion towards xbows is not negative. I believe that many of the pro-xbow issues raised by you and others are legitimate and reasonable points. I don't think that xbows are going to lead to any more (at most a very few) "new hunters" into the field, but an expanded xbow season would certainly offer new opportunity (which in principle is a positive). The staunchest "anti-xbowers" choose to ignore the positive dimensions of a new expanded weapons season. 

On the other hand, there are social dynamics at play and reasonable perceptions by the other side, which I believe also get equally ignored. I would have offered zero objections if KDFWR took a slower approach to expansion. Add a few weeks in 2005, and then a few more in 2006. Once you pick up enough xbow users to determine the impact on the resources and social perceptions, the Dept would be in a much better position to evaluate the situation.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Oh....NOW we have to "wait" NOT hardly what YOU stated just above is it now???? I won't call YOU names though......:cocktail: :darkbeer:


You know ACE, I thought of One more thing that migth have been wrong with the survey that might have been overlooked. How did Cornell know that the person answering the phone was the person they wanted the information from? it was done by computer correct? Oh and believe me its there... Just takes a while to rear its ugly head. Thats what motivates people who have never shot one to spend countless hours on every website imaginable hunting related to type pages after pages of hurtful and meaningless stuff to further divide sportsman such as yourself. You've completely gone from..."We will take nothing less than full expansion" to "I'm okay with what we got". Not real firm ground or credibility. kinda like a few surveys I know.


----------



## Free Range

And as for this “Cornell” survey if they are so credible why would they risk using questions submitted by those paying for the survey. I would think the better way to go about it would have been for the KY DNR to tell Cornell what they are wanting to know, i.e. how much support is there for full expansion. And let the prestigious Cornell write the questions, kind of fishy to me.


----------



## Jim C

I love the nonsense about the reward system. its camoflauge for an entitlement mentality based on the false assumption that people using compounds somehow have earned a right to hunt because it takes a couple more days to properly learn to shoot that bow accurately enough to hunt with

sadly, there is no guarantee that actually happens in the real world and that attitude should play no relevance in DNR decisions and such psychobabble had nothing to do with the legislative history behind the seasons. 

as I have long noted-if entitlement is tied to hours of practice, my nationally ranked JOAD kids ought to have more right to hunt than 95% of the bowhunters in this country since those kids have more proven range hours than the vast majority of bowhunters.


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> *SB 211 drafted for sole purpose*: Ace, this thread is too long for me to go back and re-read everything, but I assume that you're asking whether SB 211 was promulgated to force a compromise? If that is the question, then the answer is "No." It was drafted with the intent of becoming law. We were more than ready and willing to take our chances with the legislature and the Governor. This issue was NEVER EVER linked to any other legislation or with the belief that a compromise would ensue. The meeting that led to the "compromise" was actually called by Sec'y of Commerce Ward (not the Senators or Governor or anybody else) as a last minute attempt to work out a solution that everybody could live with.
> *
> 
> Thank you!
> Future Issues*: Yes, I'm all in favor of working with others in future cases. I harbor no resentment towards anyone over the xbow issue, and I'm not sure why you'd think I'm not willing to work in a cooperative fashion.
> 
> I didn't know, so I simply asked, again thank you!
> 
> My opinion towards xbows is not negative. I believe that many of the pro-xbow issues raised by you and others are legitimate and reasonable points. I don't think that xbows are going to lead to any more (at most a very few) "new hunters" into the field, but an expanded xbow season would certainly offer new opportunity (which in principle is a positive). The staunchest "anti-xbowers" choose to ignore the positive dimensions of a new expanded weapons season.
> 
> On the other hand, there are social dynamics at play and reasonable perceptions by the other side, which I believe also get equally ignored. I would have offered zero objections if KDFWR took a slower approach to expansion. Add a few weeks in 2005, and then a few more in 2006. Once you pick up enough xbow users to determine the impact on the resources and social perceptions, the Dept would be in a much better position to evaluate the situation.


I agree with most of what you're saying here, a great post imho, and thanks for taking the time to respond, I actually do appreciate it very much!


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> You know ACE, I thought of One more thing that migth have been wrong with the survey that might have been overlooked. How did Cornell know that the person answering the phone was the person they wanted the information from? it was done by computer correct?
> 
> NO not correct, it WAS done by people who were at all times monitered by many means including computer....fwiw
> 
> 
> Oh and believe me its there... Just takes a while to rear its ugly head. Thats what motivates people who have never shot one to spend countless hours on every website imaginable hunting related to type pages after pages of hurtful and meaningless stuff to further divide sportsman such as yourself. You've completely gone from..."We will take nothing less than full expansion" to "I'm okay with what we got". Not real firm ground or credibility. kinda like a few surveys I know.


I never ever said, I was against what WE got, (especially since it WAS much more than some deals WE had offered)ONLY on how it was done(main point WE were left out of the final dealings) period.....YOU call it whatever or however YOU like, doesn't change anything, however for the sake of UNITY, I'm actually trying to focus on the postive aspects rather than the very negative ones.......unlike some

And YOU obviously don't know enough about the survey to have any relevent opinion


----------



## Marvin

Free Range said:


> And as for this “Cornell” survey if they are so credible why would they risk using questions submitted by those paying for the survey. I would think the better way to go about it would have been for the KY DNR to tell Cornell what they are wanting to know, i.e. how much support is there for full expansion. And let the prestigious Cornell write the questions, kind of fishy to me.


Yeah, they just had their mind made up and found someone to give them the answers. Super fishy if you ask me. Loosk like there needs to be a distress beacon sent out to all other states. Rent a survey is not a quality production.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> And as for this “Cornell” survey if they are so credible why would they risk using questions submitted by those paying for the survey. I would think the better way to go about it would have been for the KY DNR to tell Cornell what they are wanting to know, i.e. how much support is there for full expansion. And let the prestigious Cornell write the questions, kind of fishy to me.


NO "risk" at all, those paying for any contract have the RIGHT and obligation to insure what they're paying for is acheived (in this case that was "how much support does the expanded season have) WE know the results......the "spin" is "funny" odd, and *unfounded* that fact has not yet changed, it's "old news" at this point anyway.......WE paid for it, none of you guys(well most posting about it had NO expense or input).....it's not any of your concern, nor do you have any basis for those absurd claims, I know that won't stop you, but it's still a fact.......

NO one(from either side) would have excepted it , without the MAIN points being addressed, those were what was provided by the KDFWR period....it's all right there for all to see on the Dept's web site, including the entire survey........NOTHING "Odd" or "unusal" or "leading", much less any of the other things alledged......nor were the questions "hard to understand" nor can anyone even begin to convince most they in any way provided any known result........period.........too many have examined it for far too long to even doubt that fact...

There is nothing "wrong" with those who pay for a survey to have a part in the questions asked, in fact it's the "norm" .........


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Yeah, they just had their mind made up and found someone to give them the answers. Super fishy if you ask me. Loosk like there needs to be a distress beacon sent out to all other states. Rent a survey is not a quality production.


Yet more unfounded accusations, misinformation, in other words even more of the same.......better idea, do one "in state" and let's see WHO has the most influence......on a matter that directly affects that state (the MAIN reason why WE chose an independent source, WE being the KDFWR fwiw).....

It's foolish to expect ANY "in state" enity to NOT be biased one way or the other when the fact IS the results effect people they know who hunt(in this case)........NO spin will change that.......it's niether relevent, since it was decided to NOT allow "in state politics" to make any difference either way, thus an "outside source" was used (who had NO stake in the outcome either way).........

Some ideas are really too foolish to need answering.......yet I supposse they need to be.......for some


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NO "risk" at all, those paying for any contract have the RIGHT and obligation to insure what they're paying for is acheived (in this case that was "how much support does the expanded season have) WE know the results......the "spin" is "funny" odd, and *unfounded* that fact has not yet changed, it's "old news" at this point anyway.......WE paid for it, none of you guys(well most posting about it had NO expense or input).....it's not any of your concern, nor do you have any basis for those absurd claims, I know that won't stop you, but it's still a fact.......
> 
> NO one(from either side) would have excepted it , without the MAIN points being addressed, those were what was provided by the KDFWR period....it's all right there for all to see on the Dept's web site, including the entire survey........NOTHING "Odd" or "unusal" or "leading", much less any of the other things alledged......nor were the questions "hard to understand" nor can anyone even begin to convince most they in any way provided any known result........period.........too many have examined it for far too long to even doubt that fact...
> 
> There is nothing "wrong" with those who pay for a survey to have a part in the questions asked, in fact it's the "norm" .........


You just said its not your speciality when I asked you for a reasonable number. So soon we forget. Those online university degrees are what they used to be eh Ace.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Yet more unfounded accusations, misinformation, in other words even more of the same.......better idea, do one "in state" and let's see WHO has the most influence......on a matter that directly affects that state (the MAIN reason why WE chose an independent source, WE being the KDFWR fwiw).....
> 
> It's foolish to expect ANY "in state" enity to NOT be biased one way or the other when the fact IS the results effect people they know who hunt(in this case)........NO spin will change that.......it's niether relevent, since it was decided to NOT allow "in state politics" to make any difference either way, thus an "outside source" was used (who had NO stake in the outcome either way).........
> 
> Some ideas are really too foolish to need answering.......yet I supposse they need to be.......for some


So are you saying cornell is not qualified to do a survey in New york? they are probably the exception I am sure...


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Yet more unfounded accusations, misinformation, in other words even more of the same.......better idea, do one "in state" and let's see WHO has the most influence......on a matter that directly affects that state (the MAIN reason why WE chose an independent source, WE being the KDFWR fwiw).....
> 
> It's foolish to expect ANY "in state" enity to NOT be biased one way or the other when the fact IS the results effect people they know who hunt(in this case)........NO spin will change that.......it's niether relevent, since it was decided to NOT allow "in state politics" to make any difference either way, thus an "outside source" was used (who had NO stake in the outcome either way).........
> 
> Some ideas are really too foolish to need answering.......yet I supposse they need to be.......for some


Wait a minute you just "lied" again. you said that the survey could have been biased by someone in state doing it. How is that possible when they are just supposed to administer the questions they are *given*? Everyone knows its how you word it can predict the outcome. Tsk, tsk


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Wait a minute you just "lied" again. you said that the survey could have been biased by someone in state doing it. How is that possible when they are just *supposed to *administer the questions they are *given*? Everyone knows its how you word it can predict the outcome. Tsk, tsk



YOU are NOT even close.......in the first case..............

IF I have to explain how those who ARE impacted by anything(not to mention "political pressure") might manipualte the outcome, then you're beyond my ability to explain anything to....

*Would you support or oppose expanding crossbow season from its current time frame to a time frame that runs at the same time with archery season for deer? Would you say you: <1> Strongly oppose expanding crossbow season <2> Somewhat oppose expanding crossbow season <3> Neither support nor oppose expanding crossbow season <4> Somewhat support expanding crossbow season <5> Strongly support expanding crossbow season [green]<d> Do not know <r> Refused @ *

THAT (from the survey) is NOT anywhere even close to what YOU are alledging........sheesh......the "spin" never ends with some of you....(note the FIRST answers are for OPPOSE) not support....... 


(I would have probably put support first answers, but then again, I wanted this, which should explain why it's best not done "in state" )

EVERY question asked was in the exact same format, WHO exactly do you know who A) can't understand what's being asked B) COULD be "led" by these questions???

Once again, more "spin" unfounded claims and accusations based upon rhetoric(if even that)........NO basis in facts though at all


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> So are you saying cornell is not qualified to do a survey in New york? they are probably the exception I am sure...


NOPE, not saying that at all, nor is for ME to say, not being a resident of that state, In Ky(where I do reside and hunt and know a bit about the "poliitics as well) however I stand my my stance it was "wise" and prudent to seek outside independent source, and Cornell was a great one imho

they (Cornell did in fact do one in their home state, against inclusion of the cb in fact) another "non-point" made and scored


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> YOU are NOT even close.......in the first case..............
> 
> IF I have to explain how those who ARE impacted by anything(not to mention "political pressure") might manipualte the outcome, then you're beyond my ability to explain anything to....
> 
> *Would you support or oppose expanding crossbow season from its current time frame to a time frame that runs at the same time with archery season for deer? Would you say you: <1> Strongly oppose expanding crossbow season <2> Somewhat oppose expanding crossbow season <3> Neither support nor oppose expanding crossbow season <4> Somewhat support expanding crossbow season <5> Strongly support expanding crossbow season [green]<d> Do not know <r> Refused @ *
> 
> THAT (from the survey) is NOT anywhere even close to what YOU are alledging........sheesh......the "spin" never ends with some of you....(note the FIRST answers are for OPPOSE) not support.......
> 
> 
> (I would have probably put support first answers, but then again, I wanted this, which should explain why it's best not done "in state" )
> 
> EVERY question asked was in the exact same format, WHO exactly do you know who A) can't understand what's being asked B) COULD be "led" by these questions???
> 
> Once again, more "spin" unfounded claims and accusations based upon rhetoric(if even that)........NO basis in facts though at all



I am suprised , like free range, that such a highly decorated college is not competant enough to fill out unbiased questions. Real fishy that he deaprtment is doing it.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> You just said its not your speciality when I asked you for a reasonable number.
> 
> None of that has changed......however other "experts" have stated thier opinion and even one that I recall on the kyhunting forum, which supported the findings and explained them to all quite well in fact..fwiw
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So soon we forget.
> 
> Yes you have a habit of doing just that
> 
> 
> Those online university degrees are what they used to be eh Ace.


Yet another unfounded not relevent claim, as usual, and even expected from some on here, when you have nothing else make any accusations, or claims possible with NO worry if there is even a "shred" of truth to any of them.....desperate tactics used by desperate people, and most can see that fact.... My wife (who is working right now on her Master's Degree, might find this amuzing, I see no where that it's relevent though)....


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> I am suprised , like free range, that such a highly decorated college is not competant enough to fill out unbiased questions. Real fishy that he deaprtment is doing it.



Fine for you then, when you're ready to "shell out" $70,000+ for a survey make certain that you have NO input......unless YOU actually do that, then you're talking "big" simply for the sake of making silly noises......I seriously doubt anyone would be so foolish, gladly the KDFWR wasn't....:cocktail:

Still more "old news" the survey is what it is, says what it says, and stands on it's own merits, despite some very feeble attempts to dispute it with unfounded claims, allegations and accusations, without any real proof that is the way it will remain.....


----------



## doctariAFC

Cornell University cnducts scientific surveys and studies for many DNRs and DECs across the fruited plain. They are one of the TOP SCHOOLS in terms of Agriculture, Wildlife Biology and Veterinary Sciences in the Nation, bar none.

I do not believe the credibility of Cornell University can be called out. Not even remotely.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> NOPE, not saying that at all, nor is for ME to say, not being a resident of that state, In Ky(where I do reside and hunt and know a bit about the "poliitics as well) however I stand my my stance it was "wise" and prudent to seek outside independent source, and Cornell was a great one imho
> 
> they (Cornell did in fact do one in their home state, against inclusion of the cb in fact) another "non-point" made and scored


No i just gave you a spring board. Of course you have yet to set that little light bulb off in your noggin. Did KDF&W write the questions for the new york survey too:tongue: So to you, there is now way that any university can do a survey in state because of politics?


----------



## JDMiller

Marvin said:


> Wait a minute you just "lied" again. you said that the survey could have been biased by someone in state doing it. How is that possible when they are just supposed to administer the questions they are *given*? Everyone knows its how you word it can predict the outcome. Tsk, tsk




Performing the survey by a entity outside of Kentucky was probably a good idea. There are several involved on both sides of this with connections to the in-state universities.....including myself. I've worked for a in-state university for 20 plus years and even though my job does not pertain in any shape, form or fashion with departments that would do surveys......it could still be stated I could influence the outcome just with asociation or at least perceived that way pending the outcome.


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Yet another unfounded not relevent claim, as usual, and even expected from some on here, when you have nothing else make any accusations, or claims possible with NO worry if there is even a "shred" of truth to any of them.....desperate tactics used by desperate people, and most can see that fact.... My wife (who is working right now on her Master's Degree, might find this amuzing, I see no where that it's relevent though)....


Master degree...easy word to throw around bud. you gotta put something behind it to mean something. My wife's 10 hours short of her doctorate. looks like your wife is still a leg down the rung.


----------



## Marvin

doctariAFC said:


> Cornell University cnducts scientific surveys and studies for many DNRs and DECs across the fruited plain. They are one of the TOP SCHOOLS in terms of Agriculture, Wildlife Biology and Veterinary Sciences in the Nation, bar none.
> 
> I do not believe the credibility of Cornell University can be called out. Not even remotely.


Is it SOP for someone else to write the questions?


----------



## Jim C

doctariAFC said:


> Cornell University cnducts scientific surveys and studies for many DNRs and DECs across the fruited plain. They are one of the TOP SCHOOLS in terms of Agriculture, Wildlife Biology and Veterinary Sciences in the Nation, bar none.
> 
> I do not believe the credibility of Cornell University can be called out. Not even remotely.



I hold two degrees (MS and JD) from Cornell. I also coached there. The survey they did on the NY issue was rather lame though-it probably was based on what the person who commissioned it wanted. Asking bowhunters if their "satisfaction" with bowhunting would decrease if xbows were allowed probably garnered an accurate reflection of the sentiments-its just a worthless question

the Cornell studies aren't tainted with the outright lies and disinformation that the moronic Marlow study purveyed-that latter study was an outcome based "report" where the creator was told to slant things as much as possible against xbows-science and reality be damned. When you start talking about Roman Siege machines and papal edicts from the 13th Century you are not involved in an objective study


----------



## Marvin

JDMiller said:


> Performing the survey by a entity outside of Kentucky was probably a good idea. There are several involved on both sides of this with connections to the in-state university.....including myself. I've worked for a in-state university for 20 plus years and even though my job does not pertain in any shape, form or fashion with departments that would do surveys......it could still be stated I could influence the outcome just with asociation or at least perceived that way pending the outcome.


 Okay I am fine with that. what about the questions or the people answering them? They have no proof who answered the phone.


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> I hold two degrees (MS and JD) from Cornell. I also coached there. The survey they did on the NY issue was rather lame though-it probably was based on what the person who commissioned it wanted. Asking bowhunters if their "satisfaction" with bowhunting would decrease if xbows were allowed probably garnered an accurate reflection of the sentiments-its just a worthless question
> 
> the Cornell studies aren't tainted with the outright lies and disinformation that the moronic Marlow study purveyed-that latter study was an outcome based "report" where the creator was told to slant things as much as possible against xbows-science and reality be damned. When you start talking about Roman Siege machines and papal edicts from the 13th Century you are not involved in an objective study


Thus provide a weak link in the armor as Jim says. Thats how studies work.


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> Okay I am fine with that. what about the questions or the people answering them? They have no proof who answered the phone.


true-that's what got Kerry's hopes up-the pollsters got all the slacker kids in the households-people who voted GOP were out working not sitting by the phone watching THE PRICE IS RIGHT or DAYS OF OUR LIVES:wink:


----------



## aceoky

doctariAFC said:


> Cornell University cnducts scientific surveys and studies for many DNRs and DECs across the fruited plain. They are one of the TOP SCHOOLS in terms of Agriculture, Wildlife Biology and Veterinary Sciences in the Nation, bar none.
> 
> I do not believe the credibility of Cornell University can be called out. Not even remotely.


Agreed!

Once again the facts are on our side, regardless of the spin.......


----------



## Marvin

JDMiller said:


> Performing the survey by a entity outside of Kentucky was probably a good idea. There are several involved on both sides of this with connections to the in-state universities.....including myself. I've worked for a in-state university for 20 plus years and even though my job does not pertain in any shape, form or fashion with departments that would do surveys......it could still be stated I could influence the outcome just with asociation or at least perceived that way pending the outcome.


Would it of made more sense to hand out questionares at local game meetings and local clubs ( gun and bows) and compile those results? Two benefits Local officer PR time and hands on survey work. could have easily gotten names too. Our local officer usually comes to all our meetings to give us updates on ODNR and what they need help with.


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> true-that's what got Kerry's hopes up-the pollsters got all the slacker kids in the households-people who voted GOP were out working not sitting by the phone watching THE PRICE IS RIGHT or DAYS OF OUR LIVES:wink:


see good tactic. call during the day when everyone's working ( well supposed to be anyway)

I am surprised you have not said anything about my avitar. I must update to get you attention I guess


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> I hold two degrees (MS and JD) from Cornell. I also coached there. The survey they did on the NY issue was rather lame though-it probably was based on what the person who commissioned it wanted. Asking bowhunters if their "satisfaction" with bowhunting would decrease if xbows were allowed probably garnered an accurate reflection of the sentiments-its just a worthless question
> 
> the Cornell studies aren't tainted with the outright lies and disinformation that the moronic Marlow study purveyed-that latter study was an outcome based "report" where the creator was told to slant things as much as possible against xbows-science and reality be damned. When you start talking about Roman Siege machines and papal edicts from the 13th Century you are not involved in an objective study


I agree Jim, AND many's opinions on the crossbow have since changed since then, and in "leaps and bounds" towards the "don't care" or "why not" when at that time not many were proving the disinformation that helped the anti-expansion crowd for so long.....:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Okay I am fine with that. what about the questions or the people answering them? They have no proof who answered the phone.


I'd love to see you *try* to PROVE that *misinformation*.....

When you so obviously don't have a clue of what you're stating being even remotely true, time to something else, once again, you are very , very wrong


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I agree Jim, AND many's opinions on the crossbow have since changed since then, and in "leaps and bounds" towards the "don't care" or "why not" when at that time not many were proving the disinformation that helped the anti-expansion crowd for so long.....:cocktail:


I started out with a crossbow and have seen the light so whats that say?


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> see good tactic. call during the day when everyone's working ( well supposed to be anyway)
> 
> I am surprised you have not said anything about my avitar. I must update to get you attention I guess



Ah Teh-re-saw's pet poodle.

I heard he got a bad case of burlap disease

too much time under the sheets with old bags


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> I'd love to see you *try* to PROVE that *misinformation*.....
> 
> When you so obviously don't have a clue of what you're stating being even remotely true, time to something else, once again, you are very , very wrong


You gaurantee me, in writing that everyone that they surveyed answered the phone. Pretty simple really. You don't even know how the government works for crying out loud


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> Ah Teh-re-saw's pet poodle.
> 
> I heard he got a bad case of burlap disease
> 
> too much time under the sheets with old bags


You know what? i did NOT need that visual..... I am lambasting a democrat a month till the election...or if teh mood hits me.


----------



## doctariAFC

Marvin said:


> Is it SOP for someone else to write the questions?


Yep. Cornell conducted the survey, I didn't say the composed it 100%. Cornell does research like this all the time, but this doesn't mean the entire survey was crafted by them. Through their work in actually conducting the survey, the process and analysis maintains its integrity.

Now, it also depends greatly on the target audience for the survey. The survey conducted in NYS was geared only at bowhunters, and the commissioning agents certainly can dictate the target audience and provide the survey questions.

However, we need to examine each survey on its own, determining the scope and target and purpose of each survey to understand it's mechanics completely.

Neither here nor there. If Cornell conducted the survey, it certainly maintains its integrity. I do not think calling out Cornell is the wisest path to take regarding this survey. Yes, Cornell pre-qualifies every respondent, as to better analyze the results. Since the survey targeted HUNTERS, rather than strictly bowhunters, the results were a reflection of sentiment across the KY Hunting community, and the results are valid.


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Would it of made more sense to hand out questionares at local game meetings and local clubs ( gun and bows) and compile those results? Two benefits Local officer PR time and hands on survey work. could have easily gotten names too. Our local officer usually comes to all our meetings to give us updates on ODNR and what they need help with.


NOPE, for one, (read your posting of HCR again, take note of the LKS etc. being mentioned as IN FAVOR of expansion.......just as I've stated, some tried to deny that fact, guess Mr. Meeks, wanted to make the truth known... IF in doubt) WE already had those on OUR side, 

THEY demanded another survey, even though I (for only one) tried to explain it was a waste of time and money to do one or ten more, the one fact in thier demise, is that over 90% gun hunt, 10,000 surveys won't help them.......ever......gun hunters do not care what is or isn't legal to archery hunt with, .......some never seem to learn though....


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> You gaurantee me, in writing that everyone that they surveyed answered the phone.
> 
> First I don't have or need to do so, YOU are making the claims offer up the proof, I'm betting you can't because I KNOW how it was done as well as some who were surveyed.....
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty simple really. You don't even know how the government works for crying out loud


Sure I do, and I KNOW how the KDFWR works (and doesn't) and the rules they must abide by(and don't)......YOU have NO clue, as you've more than proven by your posting of misinformation, as always with NO proof.......

Anyone can make unfounded accusations and allegations (as you have done in regards to the KDFWR ) but with NO proof they remain unfounded.......Pretty simple really, YOU post often on things you have no clue about(one very good expample is how incorrect YOU are on what the KDFWR is and isn't "allowed" to do)......funny how you're more "knowing" than thier *team* of Ky Lawyers.........


----------



## aceoky

doctariAFC said:


> Yep. Cornell conducted the survey, I didn't say the composed it 100%. Cornell does research like this all the time, but this doesn't mean the entire survey was crafted by them. Through their work in actually conducting the survey, the process and analysis maintains its integrity.
> 
> Now, it also depends greatly on the target audience for the survey. The survey conducted in NYS was geared only at bowhunters, and the commissioning agents certainly can dictate the target audience and provide the survey questions.
> 
> However, we need to examine each survey on its own, determining the scope and target and purpose of each survey to understand it's mechanics completely.
> 
> Neither here nor there.
> 
> * If Cornell conducted the survey, it certainly maintains its integrity. I do not think calling out Cornell is the wisest path to take regarding this survey. Yes, Cornell pre-qualifies every respondent, as to better analyze the results. Since the survey targeted HUNTERS, rather than strictly bowhunters, the results were a reflection of sentiment across the KY Hunting community, and the results are valid.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> Exactly, and it's also important to note that EVERY single one of the NINE districts making up Ky were surveyed.......as they should have been


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> Master degree...easy word to throw around bud. you gotta put something behind it to mean something. My wife's 10 hours short of her doctorate. looks like your wife is still a leg down the rung.



Congrats to your wife ! (and I mean that sincerly)

"leg down the rung"?? Don't think so, she's managed to do that starting college AFTER having three children AND WORKING full-time..and in fact late in her thirties, just going back to school at that age is a major accomplishment, IMHO.......(she got her BS after turning 40 btw).....sheeesh do you ever have any positive input on others???

But why am I not surprised that rather than sending congrats you'd attempt to belittle her achievements not ever have met her, nor any reason for you doing so????

Typical, and sad...

At any rate, I'm VERY proud of what she's managed to do (and at a Private college no less)........guess you're not........fine by me , and I doubt she cares about what you think either:cocktail: :darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> I started out with a crossbow and have seen the light so whats that say?


Oh I'd say about as much as most of your posts do! :darkbeer: 

Seriously they(cb) are NOT for everyone, but some do "graduate" to other archery forms,(just as you have done, ) a proven fact, some don't, that's fine, choice is good! "Mandates" all too often are NOT good, for most...

IF you want to use a longbow(and can make a clean effective quick kill) that's great! IF you can't then a crossbow is obviously a "better choice" for "you"(whomever "you" may be)......

To REQUIRE some use a weapon they shouldn't ONLY harms the sport, most have figured out that simple fact.......besides, it should be "fun" for those participatiing in it, and losing game is NOT fun for the game nor the hunters; involved period......

THUS the point of it being "easier"(though subjective) is NOT a good enough reason to try to exclude them, easier to see why that's a reason to NOT exclude them.......because some WILL hunt regardless, so for them,the weapon they're "best with" should be at least an option........and most realize that...

IN KY the majoirty have spoken several times for expansion, they got some, so "some" justice has been served.......that also is a "good thing" for them, and for all of us, in reality, the NEXT time , it may be something the "other side" wants.......best to not burn those bridges of cooperation to quickly.......WE are all hunters, and thus should work together always for each other's best interests, THAT is and was my stance on this whole issue, all along........others didn't see it that way, maybe they will now???


----------



## doctariAFC

Hey, that's great Marvin. Just one question..... She seems like a smart gal, why did she marry you??  Was it something to do with Brad Paisley's hit "Alcohol"? :chortle: Only kidding ya, brother.... 

Seriously though. When it comes to hearing about this degree and that degree, well, I ain't all that impressed. The accomplishment, yes, but..... I have a very good friend, known him since 5th grade, who last year earned his PhD! What an accomplishment, right? Well, his PhD is in the field of......

PHILOSOPHY

 Don't get me wrong, I am proud of him for his dedication, but, dedication doesn't pay the bills..... He is looking to find a professor's position somewhere, but that field isn't one of those "high-demand" realms.....

My little sister, on the other hand, has her Masters in Clinical Psychology, and is doing "great." She was actually making a heck of a boatload of cash when she lived and worked in Kentucky, but then she got divorced and moved back to NY. Her Masters Degree for this field was awesome, but didn't do much for her without the Social Services certifications. Freaking NYS. She's all licensed and certified up now, so she should be all good now. 

Funny how all that education some receive really does little more than pad the ego.....  

And then there's folks like me. BS in Marine Science and Biology.... And how do I use this edumacation? Well, I catch a lot of fish..... And I work in the HVAC industry as a Network Engineer and MS SQL Database Adminstrator. Go figure...:confused3:


----------



## aceoky

Marvin said:


> see good tactic. call during the day when everyone's working ( well supposed to be anyway)
> 
> OR some could just as easily maintain a very good way to get the anti-hunting females to respond, no point especially since so many work second and third shifts , yes even in KY......
> 
> 
> 
> Plenty of "speculations" no facts.......
Click to expand...


----------



## JavaMan

who's Doug?

you are confused.

JavaMan


----------



## aceoky

For those who might care, my wife is seeking her Master's Degree in Special Education (though she could have made more $$$ in Computer Information Science, which would have taken her less time and $$$ and classes and tests fwiw)...

Guess she values the effects/affects of others above $$$ (wonder where she might have learned that):wink: 

She has spent much time and $$$ on helping out with "Special Needs" children, and loves it, so long as what she's doing makes her that happy, I'm happy with and for her.....fwiw


----------



## aceoky

doctariAFC said:


> Hey, that's great Marvin. Just one question..... She seems like a smart gal, why did she marry you??  Was it something to do with Brad Paisley's hit "Alcohol"? :chortle:
> 
> I'd like to blame that for getting mine, but she was only 17 so it must have been some other "failing of her intellect" for the moment LOL
> 
> 
> Only kidding ya, brother....
> 
> Seriously though. When it comes to hearing about this degree and that degree, well, I ain't all that impressed. The accomplishment, yes, but..... I have a very good friend, known him since 5th grade, who last year earned his PhD! What an accomplishment, right? *Well, his PhD is in the field of......
> 
> PHILOSOPHY*
> Don't get me wrong, I am proud of him for his dedication, but, dedication doesn't pay the bills..... He is looking to find a professor's position somewhere, but that field isn't one of those "high-demand" realms.....
> 
> My little sister, on the other hand, has her Masters in Clinical Psychology, and is doing "great." She was actually making a heck of a boatload of cash when she lived and worked in Kentucky, but then she got divorced and moved back to NY. Her Masters Degree for this field was awesome, but didn't do much for her without the Social Services certifications. Freaking NYS. She's all licensed and certified up now, so she should be all good now.
> 
> That's AWESOME ......and a great field to be in
> 
> Funny how all that education some receive really does little more than pad the ego.....
> 
> Sad but often true
> 
> And then there's folks like me. BS in Marine Science and Biology.... And how do I use this edumacation? Well, I catch a lot of fish..... And I work in the HVAC industry as a Network Engineer and MS SQL Database Adminstrator. Go figure...:confused3:


A future Politician NO doubt!! :cocktail: :wink:


----------



## aceoky

JavaMan said:


> who's Doug?
> 
> you are confused.
> 
> JavaMan


Hope my answers to your question helped......btw


----------



## aceoky

Ballard btw you have a PM........hope you'll read it; it's relevent I believe to you


----------



## Free Range

> Marlow study purveyed-that latter study was an outcome based "report" where the creator was told to slant things as much as possible against xbows-science and reality be damned.


Of course you have proof of this???


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Of course you have proof of this???



having dealt with a few hundred "expert reports" in trial I can pretty much spot a "prostituted" report without much effort. When you lie, post absolute disinformation and try to make xbows look bad by talking about 700 year old papal edicts its obvious to anyone not suffering PBSDS* that the report was not intended to even be objective advocacy. It was a deliberate lied filled piece of dung designed to be given to entities that wouldn't know any better

*Professional BS Derangement Syndrome


----------



## aceoky

UH-OH FR

Once again, you've been "handled" with truth and facts.........:darkbeer: .

Jim C , myself and JD etc. are NOT doing this for ourselves, but for others, most can easily see the differnce in that and the "mine" mine mine you are spewing forth

BTW, YES I also see bowhunting as special (just as you stated) the real differnce between you and I is, I want many others to KNOW why, unlike you who hope to keep as many others "out" as is possible

The "weapon" makes the man..........to you........to me........every man is (or woman, kid, senior for that matter IS their own perosn, their tactics, ethiics etc, makes them, NOT weapons used)........

I"m for oppotunity, NOT exclusions.......my facts are indeed facts unlike your biased opinions........I'm for MORE archery hunters......NOT less as you are.....and saying they ALL can hunt by simply picking up a compound , leaves too many out (women, youth, senior hunters, as well as those working two jobs or moer to make ends meet) to even allow myself to "think" the way you do........

And before you "go there" BIG differnece in archery opportunity and "any season-any weapon" and guns in archery season.........YOU even should be able to grasp that differnece, unless you've found the 250 yard crossbow......that none of us have yet seen.........NOT the same to anyone


BTW.....NO way does inclusion "cause loss", YOU and YOURS can still use a stick and string IF that Is what you choose..........it IS about CHOICE........no more and no less...........

AS hunters ( and I am a bowhunter period, anyone who knows me knows that IS a FACT.....) I just don't worry about others nearly so much........I have found NO good reason to do so.........(and there are more bowhunters which agree than you can find in KY who don't btw)


----------



## aceoky

Some have actually made the statement that MY "more hunters spread out over a very long season " is "pure bs" so I think a :"test " is in order.....

HOW about all of us who have any "pull" with anyone (especially the NRA for example) work toward changing "bow season"(it's not in MOST states but they claim it) from it's current LONG time to TWO WEEKS......then see how many "archery hunters" there are in ONE year......

Obviously I'm "joking" and would NEVER ask for that, but the fact remains IF that did occur........THAT would in fact "destroy " archery season....."overnight" so while you're stating that IS our goal.........I find it so interesting, cb don't even need to be mentioned to do that.......

SEE? BS is BS.......

I have YET to see the first "pro guy" against bowhunting...........even though that LIE abounds.......and too often.....

Most KNOW I've stated this often before........fact IS:

The HSUS, has merged with another major group, their combined goal IS to end ALL bowhunting Nationwide, NO one can dispute that with facts because it's "common knowledge".........

Now some of you are "content" in dividing hunters (even archery hunters) KNOWING this fact...............*I* however am NOT......

I not only love archery hunting, and want to share that love with others, I actually want to be able to preserve it...............NOW........NOT with "tradition" that will NO longer "sell" but with facts and MORE archery hunters........

THAT is why this thread is here............and I hope the reasion why it's lasted so long, (despite the obvious attempts to end it ) 

Either WE hang together or WE shall certainly hang seperatley.........Ben Franklin said that about the Revoloution then...............still fits for US..........I believe........

IN the "END" what matters "the most" to you guys???

Archery surviving..............OR NOT........surviving???

Some contend , EVEN with Millions of $$$ against us........WE will ALL "band together".........IS IT worth the risk????

AS marvin said, "simple really"

For "my part" I will welcome them all, cb, longbows, recurves and compouds.....equally..........numbers matter........to "assume" otherwise is foolish and dangerous , KNOWING what WE love is at risk........period


Please try to convince me (and us) otherwise............


----------



## thesource

Yeeehawww! Now this is a target rich environment! 

Nothing I enjoy more than exposing the lies, hypocrisy, and misrepresentation of the crossbow pushers!:darkbeer: 

Where to begin ...... 



doctariAFC said:


> Now, it also depends greatly on the target audience for the survey. The survey conducted in NYS was geared only at bowhunters, and the commissioning agents certainly can dictate the target audience and provide the survey questions.


UH -OH! Big FAT fib! 

_the 1995 and 1999 DEC/Cornell University deer hunting regulations survey that determined that the majority of *all big game hunters *are opposed to the use of the crossbow during the “regular” firearms season. These surveys were paid for by tax payer dollars in order to determine the opinions of the majority of hunters in NYS and the results of these surveys should not be taken lightly by any parties in NY. 

A 1995 survey titled Evaluation of Proposals For Change In Deer Hunting Regulation conducted by Cornell University at the request of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation concluded that "hunters generally do not support the use of the crossbow."

When *deer hunters *were asked if they were in support of the use of crossbows during the regular firearms season three quarters of the respondents (75.5%) said their satisfaction would change. Of those a majority (68.2%) said their satisfaction would decrease if the crossbow were allowed and most of the hunters (87.1%) said their satisfaction would greatly decrease.

Copies of the survey can be obtained from the Human Dimensions Research Unit, Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. 14853-3001_

So much for your "facts," eh Doc? 
Now that you know "All Big Game Hunters" were involved, I'm sure this now applies:


doctariAFC said:


> Since the survey targeted HUNTERS, rather than strictly bowhunters, the results were a reflection of sentiment across the KY Hunting community, and the results are valid.


 


Wait, there's more.



aceoky said:


> There is nothing "wrong" with those who pay for a survey to have a part in the questions asked, in fact it's the "norm" .........





doctariAFC said:


> Cornell conducted the survey, I didn't say the composed it 100%. Cornell does research like this all the time, but this doesn't mean the entire survey was crafted by them. Through their work in actually conducting the survey, the process and analysis maintains its integrity.





Jim C said:


> The survey they did on the NY issue was rather lame though-it probably was based on what the person who commissioned it wanted.



Uh - oh. Decension in the troops. Somebody find the talking points memo, quick! 

LOL. Hypocrisy at its finest...the KY survey by Cornell that showed results you wanted is OK - the NY survey by Cornell that proves the opposite is flawed and "based on what the person who commissioned it wanted."

Priceless. Tell me again how you have all the "facts?" It looks like a chinese fire drill to me..... 
 

There's more, but I am laughing too hard to continue. 


OK - one more......


doctariAFC said:


> I do not believe the credibility of Cornell University can be called out. Not even remotely.


Well? When you all decide whether they can or can't be called out, let us know..... 

I'll leave you with this, my edits in red:



Jim C said:


> having dealt with a few hundred "expert posts" in AT,I can pretty much spot a "prostituted" post without much effort. When you lie, post absolute disinformation and try to make the other side look bad by claiming that crossbows are identical to compounds its obvious to anyone not suffering PBSDS* that the post was not intended to even be objective advocacy. It was a deliberate lied filled piece of dung designed to be given to entities that wouldn't know any better
> 
> *Professional BS Derangement Syndrome


Now THAT's funny!  :darkbeer:


----------



## Jim C

what's funny source is your mental issues that cause you to want to restrict the activities of others merely to gratify your own sense of self worth

after you conceded "NO HARM" all that is left is your ego and believe me that is as funny as it is pathetic


----------



## thesource

LOL.

No, Jim. Conceding that legalizing crossbows wouldn't harm me is called HONESTY, and you should try it. Of course there is much more to the issue than whether or not it harms me, personally.

Exposing you and your sides LIES, hypocrisy, misrepresentations, and pure BS makes me giggle....

I can't help myself.

In fact, I'm laughing at you right now


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> No, Jim. Conceding that legalizing crossbows wouldn't harm me is called HONESTY, and you should try it. Of course there is much more to the issue than whether or not it harms me, personally.
> 
> Exposing you and your sides LIES, hypocrisy, misrepresentations, and pure BS makes me giggle....
> 
> I can't help myself.
> 
> In fact, I'm laughing at you right now



its the sign of the insane. nothing is more pathetic than someone who wants to impose his idiotic selfish views on others merely because he has mental problems that cause him to get upset over the fact that other people don't buy into his narrow view of how a recreational activity should be pursued

tell me source-if xbow voters become the majority in your state why shouldn't they vote to keep you from ever bowhunting in "Their season"

paybacks are fair aren't they? how would you like it if xbow archers imposed a proficiency test that a trad archer (an allegation you make) like you couldn't pass on the grounds that they wanted to eliminate "wounders"


you would squeal like Ned Beatty in Deliverance over the "unfairness"


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> No, Jim. Conceding that legalizing crossbows wouldn't harm me is called HONESTY, and you should try it. Of course there is much more to the issue than whether or not it harms me, personally.
> 
> Exposing you and your sides LIES, hypocrisy, misrepresentations, and pure BS makes me giggle....
> 
> I can't help myself.
> 
> In fact, I'm laughing at you right now


Has anyone seen source prove I have lied on this board? come on source-post one


----------



## JavaMan

Mr Source is deranged. I think that is obvious. He posts drivel.

this guy makes an assumption that I am someone I am not and I challenge him to prove otherwise.

JavaMan


----------



## spec

Just more opinions stated as fact.


----------



## Marvin

doctariAFC said:


> Hey, that's great Marvin. Just one question..... She seems like a smart gal, why did she marry you??  Was it something to do with Brad Paisley's hit "Alcohol"? :chortle: Only kidding ya, brother....
> 
> Seriously though. When it comes to hearing about this degree and that degree, well, I ain't all that impressed. The accomplishment, yes, but..... I have a very good friend, known him since 5th grade, who last year earned his PhD! What an accomplishment, right? Well, his PhD is in the field of......
> 
> PHILOSOPHY
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I am proud of him for his dedication, but, dedication doesn't pay the bills..... He is looking to find a professor's position somewhere, but that field isn't one of those "high-demand" realms.....
> 
> My little sister, on the other hand, has her Masters in Clinical Psychology, and is doing "great." She was actually making a heck of a boatload of cash when she lived and worked in Kentucky, but then she got divorced and moved back to NY. Her Masters Degree for this field was awesome, but didn't do much for her without the Social Services certifications. Freaking NYS. She's all licensed and certified up now, so she should be all good now.
> 
> Funny how all that education some receive really does little more than pad the ego.....
> 
> And then there's folks like me. BS in Marine Science and Biology.... And how do I use this edumacation? Well, I catch a lot of fish..... And I work in the HVAC industry as a Network Engineer and MS SQL Database Adminstrator. Go figure...:confused3:



My wife loves me for my John Wayne attitude. After seeing Ace's posts. I could see how needed your sister is in Kentucky. that could be a 7 day a week shop at one persons house. Just remember who originally threw out the Master name tag first. Ace after your about face, I doubt anything you say is sincere or in good spirits.


----------



## Free Range

> The "weapon" makes the man..........to you........to me........every man is (or woman, kid, senior for that matter IS their own perosn, their tactics, ethiics etc, makes them, NOT weapons used)........


Yes, then if they hunted with a gun during bow season it wouldn’t matter much would it? 



> ( and I am a bowhunter period, anyone who knows me knows that IS a FACT.....)


Can’t find anybody that does know you. 



> Now some of you are "content" in dividing hunters (even archery hunters) KNOWING this fact...............*I* however am NOT......


Seams like to me you are the biggest divider here. 



> THAT is why this thread is here............and I hope the reasion why it's lasted so long, (despite the obvious attempts to end it )


You should really talk to Jim, But your right despite his many attempts to end this thread it’s still here.


----------



## Free Range

> Has anyone seen source prove I have lied on this board? come on source-post one


When you call someone else a liar without proof, I would call that a lie. 



> its the sign of the insane. nothing is more pathetic than someone who wants to impose his idiotic selfish views on others merely because he has mental problems that cause him to get upset over the fact that other people don't buy into his narrow view of how a recreational activity should be pursued


Excellent Source, whenever you nail Jim his typical response is above. He can’t answer for his hypocrisy so he resorts to character assassination, by the way it’s not working, we all see him for what he truly is. 
It’s funny how the “Big Three” can’t even get it straight between themselves. Heck one of them, Ace I think, even jumped on Tim4Trout, a well known xb advocate for proposing his season structure. Of course he did it in jest but he (ace) is so blinded by hatred of bowhunters, that any time something looks like it’s against xb’s he jumps in the pool without looking to see if there is any water in it. 
Funny really, but at the same time sad.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Yeeehawww! Now this is a target rich environment!
> 
> Nothing I enjoy more than exposing the lies, hypocrisy, and misrepresentation of the crossbow pushers!:darkbeer:
> 
> Where to begin ......
> 
> 
> 
> UH -OH! Big FAT fib!
> 
> _the 1995 and 1999 DEC/Cornell University deer hunting regulations survey that determined that the majority of *all big game hunters *are opposed to the use of the crossbow during the “regular” firearms season. These surveys were paid for by tax payer dollars in order to determine the opinions of the majority of hunters in NYS and the results of these surveys should not be taken lightly by any parties in NY.
> 
> A 1995 survey titled Evaluation of Proposals For Change In Deer Hunting Regulation conducted by Cornell University at the request of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation concluded that "hunters generally do not support the use of the crossbow."
> 
> When *deer hunters *were asked if they were in support of the use of crossbows during the regular firearms season three quarters of the respondents (75.5%) said their satisfaction would change. Of those a majority (68.2%) said their satisfaction would decrease if the crossbow were allowed and most of the hunters (87.1%) said their satisfaction would greatly decrease.
> 
> Copies of the survey can be obtained from the Human Dimensions Research Unit, Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. 14853-3001_
> 
> So much for your "facts," eh Doc?
> Now that you know "All Big Game Hunters" were involved, I'm sure this now applies:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, there's more.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh - oh. Decension in the troops. Somebody find the talking points memo, quick!
> 
> LOL. Hypocrisy at its finest...the KY survey by Cornell that showed results you wanted is OK - the NY survey by Cornell that proves the opposite is flawed and "based on what the person who commissioned it wanted."
> 
> Priceless. Tell me again how you have all the "facts?" It looks like a chinese fire drill to me.....
> 
> 
> There's more, but I am laughing too hard to continue.
> 
> 
> OK - one more......
> 
> 
> Well? When you all decide whether they can or can't be called out, let us know.....
> 
> I'll leave you with this, my edits in red:
> 
> 
> 
> Now THAT's funny!  :darkbeer:


Actually Source, I have more inside information concerning those surveys than you do. The primary target for these surveys were bowhunters. You do not have to take my word for it. You can contact the Erie County Federation and ask a guy named Tony Gonnello for the details on that one. I am merely relaying inside information.

Next issue you have is the statement of truth concerning surveys. Those who desire a survey be conducted typically draft the survey and PAY a Marketing firm big bucks to conduct the survey. Those who do not have the thousands, if not tens of thousands, to have these surveys conducted, compiled and analyzed often go to the Universities, especially Cornell. They do not conduct surveys for free, but the cost is far less than a market research firm, and I do believe you must be a 5013C Corp to take advantage of Cornell's survey services. No dissention in the ranks, just providing you some valuable education into the survey process. Again, you're grasping at straws.

Now, Cornell's credibility to provide accurate, unbiased results cannot be questioned with any genuosity. However, one can certainly call into question the construction of the survey conducted. This doesn't change the fact that Cornell does indeed fairly conduct surveys, and does indeed analyze them accurately. Since they really aren't all that involved in the drafting of the questions, beyond editing some Q's if the original ones are "inappropriate", Cornell maintains the highest standards of integrity. They wouldn't be where they are today if they operated any other way, true or false?

I hope that helps clarify this for you, Source.


----------



## thesource

Doctari, allow me to further expose your misrepresentation for what it is.

Here's what you FIRST said (emphasis is mine):



doctariAFC said:


> The survey conducted in NYS was geared *only* at bowhunter


And when I called you on it, here is how you twisted it(again, emphasis is mine):



doctariAFC said:


> Actually Source, I have more inside information concerning those surveys than you do. *The primary target *for these surveys were bowhunters.


Even if you are correct this time (which I doubt), that means you misrepresented the first time. Shame on you. So much for your "facts"...and your credibility.



doctariAFC said:


> Now, Cornell's credibility to provide accurate, unbiased results cannot be questioned with any genuosity. However, one can certainly call into question the construction of the survey conducted. This doesn't change the fact that Cornell does indeed fairly conduct surveys, and does indeed analyze them accurately. Since they really aren't all that involved in the drafting of the questions, beyond editing some Q's if the original ones are "inappropriate", Cornell maintains the highest standards of integrity. They wouldn't be where they are today if they operated any other way, true or false?


I have no issues with either survey. I understand that surveys can be tilted, questions worded in such a way as to bias the results....that can happen in every survey. I also understand that surveys are actually not "truth" - they are meant to statistically represent the population with a subset of that population. I have much respect for Cornell as an institution of higher learning and I agree with your assesment that Cornell is at least as credible and effective as anyone would be. That's not the issue.

The issue is not the survey in KY or the one in NY - it is the hypocritical flip flopping between you and your compadres as to which is real, which is wrong, which is biased, which is unbiased.
Then somehow, in your sea of opinion and half truth - you all miraculously claim that you have produced "facts."

Its a funny joke - and you are part of the punchline!:darkbeer:


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Doctari, allow me to further expose your misrepresentation for what it is.
> 
> Here's what you FIRST said (emphasis is mine):
> 
> 
> 
> And when I called you on it, here is how you twisted it(again, emphasis is mine):
> 
> 
> 
> Even if you are correct this time (which I doubt), that means you misrepresented the first time. Shame on you. So much for your "facts"...and your credibility.
> 
> 
> 
> I have no issues with either survey. I understand that surveys can be tilted, questions worded in such a way as to bias the results....that can happen in every survey. I also understand that surveys are actually not "truth" - they are meant to statistically represent the population with a subset of that population. I have much respect for Cornell as an institution of higher learning and I agree with your assesment that Cornell is at least as credible and effective as anyone would be. That's not the issue.
> 
> The issue is not the survey in KY or the one in NY - it is the hypocritical flip flopping between you and your compadres as to which is real, which is wrong, which is biased, which is unbiased.
> Then somehow, in your sea of opinion and half truth - you all miraculously claim that you have produced "facts."
> 
> Its a funny joke - and you are part of the punchline!:darkbeer:




Ok, then allow me to clarify. The NY survey was targeted to those who held a big game AND Archery license. Primary respondents were those fitting this criteria. If you did not hold an archery license your participation was disregarded, not due to some anti-crossbow plot, rather, teh NYSCC and the NYSDEC both felt it important to query those who participated in both archery and regular seasons only. Of course the results being stated would reflect Big Game Hunters, as everyone needs a big game license to get a bowhunting stamp, right?

You're hoping for some hypocrisy, but you have now found none. So, I didn't misrepresent the facts. The criteria for being a qualified respondent, as was relayed to me by the folks involved in crafting these NYS surveys, were hunters holding archery licenses. If you didn't have a bowhunting stamp, you didn't get included.

Now, the information passed along to me concerning this condition could be flawed, but since I have every reason to trust the sources of this information, I stand behind it.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> When you call someone else a liar without proof, I would call that a lie.
> 
> 
> 
> Excellent Source, whenever you nail Jim his typical response is above. He can’t answer for his hypocrisy so he resorts to character assassination, by the way it’s not working, we all see him for what he truly is.
> It’s funny how the “Big Three” can’t even get it straight between themselves. Heck one of them, Ace I think, even jumped on Tim4Trout, a well known xb advocate for proposing his season structure. Of course he did it in jest but he (ace) is so blinded by hatred of bowhunters, that any time something looks like it’s against xb’s he jumps in the pool without looking to see if there is any water in it.
> Funny really, but at the same time sad.



its nice seeing the two legion of the lost members engaging in a mutual admiration society but the fact is-all you and Source have is your own sense of self worth and greed as a basis to tell others why they shouldn't be able to use one type of bow in a recreational activity. Since its character flaws, not objective arguments that fuel the anti xbow positions, discussing those flaws is legitimate


----------



## ballard

doctariAFC said:


> Ok, then allow me to clarify. The NY survey was targeted to those who held a big game AND Archery license. Primary respondents were those fitting this criteria. If you did not hold an archery license your participation was disregarded, not due to some anti-crossbow plot, rather, teh NYSCC and the NYSDEC both felt it important to query those who participated in both archery and regular seasons only. Of course the results being stated would reflect Big Game Hunters, as everyone needs a big game license to get a bowhunting stamp, right?
> 
> You're hoping for some hypocrisy, but you have now found none. So, I didn't misrepresent the facts. The criteria for being a qualified respondent, as was relayed to me by the folks involved in crafting these NYS surveys, were hunters holding archery licenses. If you didn't have a bowhunting stamp, you didn't get included.
> 
> Now, the information passed along to me concerning this condition could be flawed, but since I have every reason to trust the sources of this information, I stand behind it.


Doc - I have hard copies of a couple of Cornell's NY surveys (and related documents), and I don't think your understanding of the target respondents (i.e. archery license holders) is correct for those surveys. The most recent survey I possess is dated 1999, but there may have been a later survey which I don't possess. 

Here's a direct quote from the survey report entitled "A Survey of Deer Hunters in New York State": 

"Nearly 6,000 deer hunters were surveyed and 61% of them answered the survey. They were from all parts of the state, and some nonresident hunters were surveyed as well. Bowhunters and muzzleloaders were included as well as regular firearm season hunters." [Note: I'm not sure what survey year was being reported on though]

In a cover letter (dated 1/5/99) accompanying another survey sent out by Cornell to respondents (generically addressed as "Dear *Hunter*", not "Bowhunter") stated: "We would like you help in a study of *deer hunters' opinions* about possible new deer hunting regulations." It does not mention archers/bowhunters/elitists or anything else, just "deer hunters". 

Moreover, this 1999 survey was not limited to crossbow/archery questions and asked questions about changes in the then-existing ML season. Obviously, they aren't going to limit polling to archers when you're talking about a different season all together.


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> Doc - I have hard copies of a couple of Cornell's NY surveys (and related documents), and I don't think your understanding of the target respondents (i.e. archery license holders) is correct for those surveys. The most recent survey I possess is dated 1999, but there may have been a later survey which I don't possess.
> 
> Here's a direct quote from the survey report entitled "A Survey of Deer Hunters in New York State":
> 
> "Nearly 6,000 deer hunters were surveyed and 61% of them answered the survey. They were from all parts of the state, and some nonresident hunters were surveyed as well. Bowhunters and muzzleloaders were included as well as regular firearm season hunters." [Note: I'm not sure what survey year was being reported on though]
> 
> In a cover letter (dated 1/5/99) accompanying another survey sent out by Cornell to respondents (generically addressed as "Dear *Hunter*", not "Bowhunter") stated: "We would like you help in a study of *deer hunters' opinions* about possible new deer hunting regulations." It does not mention archers/bowhunters/elitists or anything else, just "deer hunters".
> 
> Moreover, this 1999 survey was not limited to crossbow/archery questions and asked questions about changes in the then-existing ML season. Obviously, they aren't going to limit polling to archers when you're talking about a different season all together.



RUT -ROH-RAGGY...looks like the the better load up the mystery machine and head for the house.


----------



## ballard

Just for the record. . . .I have no criticisms of Cornell regarding the Ky survey. Under the terms of the contract, KDFWR wrote the questions and provided Cornell with a list of 10,000 respondents (purported to be Ky hunting license holders). An independent outside source provided the names of the handful of landowners that were included in the survey. 

My problems with this survey primarily concern the wording. I also had questions about how the list of respondents was generated. 

Fewer than 1% of deer hunters were polled. Only 580-some deer were killed in KY last year with a xbow. Given an estimated harvest rate of 20%, that would mean that we have fewer than 3000 total xbow hunters in the state. Yet, 360+ xbow hunters (more than 10%) were somehow included. 

When I asked for the list of 10,000 names under an open records request, KDFWR initially asked for extra time to compile the list (and redact sensitive information). They later reneged and refused to provide any names, despite having done so for past surveys. 

Although SB 211 removed the need to inquire into these matters further, the oddity of this high % of xbow hunters being polled was certainly something that raised a red flag in my mind.


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> Just for the record. . . .I have no criticisms of Cornell regarding the Ky survey. Under the terms of the contract, KDFWR wrote the questions and provided Cornell with a list of 10,000 respondents (purported to be Ky hunting license holders). An independent outside source provided the names of the handful of landowners that were included in the survey.
> 
> My problems with this survey primarily concern the wording. I also had questions about how the list of respondents was generated.
> 
> Fewer than 1% of deer hunters were polled. Only 580-some deer were killed in KY last year with a xbow. Given an estimated harvest rate of 20%, that would mean that we have fewer than 3000 total xbow hunters in the state. Yet, 360+ xbow hunters (more than 10%) were somehow included.
> 
> When I asked for the list of 10,000 names under an open records request, KDFWR initially asked for extra time to compile the list (and redact sensitive information). They later reneged and refused to provide any names, despite having done so for past surveys.
> 
> Although SB 211 removed the need to inquire into these matters further, the oddity of this high % of xbow hunters being polled was certainly something that raised a red flag in my mind.



I would have to agree with you on that. As most rational people would. Did you file a protest for information under the freedom of information act?


----------



## ballard

Marvin said:


> I would have to agree with you on that. As most rational people would. Did you file a protest for information under the freedom of information act?


No, in Ky, I would've had to file a lawsuit alleging violations of KY's Open Records laws. I didn't feel the need to do that, b/c I believed that SB 211 was going to solve the problem.


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> No, in Ky, I would've had to file a lawsuit alleging violations of KY's Open Records laws. I didn't feel the need to do that, b/c I believed that SB 211 was going to solve the problem.


Well isn't refusal to provide them a violation of open records law? I would think persuing this might find some interesting stats...


----------



## Marvin

*61.880 DENIAL OF INSPECTION; ROLE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL*

(1) If a person enforces KRS 61.870 to 61.884 pursuant to this section, he shall begin enforcement under this subsection before proceeding to enforcement under subsection (2) of this section. Each public agency, upon any request for records made under KRS 61.870 to 61.884, shall determine within three (3) days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, after the receipt of any such request whether to comply with the request and shall notify in writing the person making the request, within the three (3) day period, of its decision. An agency response denying, in whole or in part, inspection of any record shall include a statement of the specific exception authorizing the withholding of the record and a brief explanation of how the exception applies to the record withheld. The response shall be issued by the official custodian or under his authority, and it shall constitute final agency action.
(2) (a) If a complaining party wishes the Attorney General to review a public agency's denial of a request to inspect a public record, the complaining party shall forward to the Attorney General a copy of the written request and a copy of the written response denying inspection. If the public agency refuses to provide a written response, a complaining party shall provide a copy of the written request. The Attorney General shall review the request and denial and issue within twenty (20) days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, a written decision stating whether the agency violated provisions of KRS 61.870 to 61.884.
(b) In unusual circumstances, the Attorney General may extend the twenty (20) day time limit by sending written notice to the complaining party and a copy to the denying agency, setting forth the reasons for the extension, and the day on which a decision is expected to be issued, which shall not exceed an additional thirty (30) work days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. As used in this section, "unusual circumstances" means, but only to the extent reasonably necessary to the proper resolution of an appeal:
1. The need to obtain additional documentation from the agency or a copy of the records involved;
2. The need to conduct extensive research on issues of first impression; or
3. An unmanageable increase in the number of appeals received by the Attorney General.
(c) On the day that the Attorney General renders his decision, he shall mail a copy to the agency and a copy to the person who requested the record in question. The burden of proof in sustaining the action shall rest with the agency, and the Attorney General may request additional documentation from the agency for substantiation. The Attorney General may also request a copy of the records involved but they shall not be disclosed.
(3) Each agency shall notify the Attorney General of any actions filed against that agency in Circuit Court regarding the enforcement of KRS 61.870 to 61.884. The Attorney General shall not, however, be named as a party in any Circuit Court actions regarding the enforcement of KRS 61.870 to 61.884, nor shall he have any duty to defend his decision in Circuit Court or any subsequent proceedings.
(4) If a person feels the intent of KRS 61.870 to 61.884 is being subverted by an agency short of denial of inspection, including but not limited to the imposition of excessive fees or the misdirection of the applicant, the person may complain in writing to the Attorney General, and the complaint shall be subject to the same adjudicatory process as if the record had been denied.
(5) (a) A party shall have thirty (30) days from the day that the Attorney General renders his decision to appeal the decision. An appeal within the thirty (30) day time limit shall be treated as if it were an action brought under KRS 61.882.
(b) If an appeal is not filed within the thirty (30) day time limit, the Attorney General's decision shall have the force and effect of law and shall be enforceable in the Circuit Court of the county where the public agency has its principal place of business or the Circuit Court of the county where the public record is maintained.


----------



## doctariAFC

ballard said:


> Doc - I have hard copies of a couple of Cornell's NY surveys (and related documents), and I don't think your understanding of the target respondents (i.e. archery license holders) is correct for those surveys. The most recent survey I possess is dated 1999, but there may have been a later survey which I don't possess.
> 
> Here's a direct quote from the survey report entitled "A Survey of Deer Hunters in New York State":
> 
> "Nearly 6,000 deer hunters were surveyed and 61% of them answered the survey. They were from all parts of the state, and some nonresident hunters were surveyed as well. Bowhunters and muzzleloaders were included as well as regular firearm season hunters." [Note: I'm not sure what survey year was being reported on though]
> 
> In a cover letter (dated 1/5/99) accompanying another survey sent out by Cornell to respondents (generically addressed as "Dear *Hunter*", not "Bowhunter") stated: "We would like you help in a study of *deer hunters' opinions* about possible new deer hunting regulations." It does not mention archers/bowhunters/elitists or anything else, just "deer hunters".
> 
> Moreover, this 1999 survey was not limited to crossbow/archery questions and asked questions about changes in the then-existing ML season. Obviously, they aren't going to limit polling to archers when you're talking about a different season all together.


I'm speaking more towards the 1996 survey. However, as you may well see, the target audience was not all hunters. The target was the holders of licenses additional to Big Game license. The criteria is that they, the respondents, held an archery license in addition to the Big Game License. In NYS you need to have a Big Game license in order to have an archery or ML license. The desired target was those hunters holding the archery stamp as well as the big game license, as the archery stamp afforded you the ability to hunt in the extended season (which is both ML and archery) and the extended season for archery was typically longer (up until 2005 season) that it was for black powder. In terms of the 1999 survey, one of the primary purposes was to gauge whether hunters (archery hunters in specific) would be amicable to expansion of the extended black powder season.

The 1996 survey was to find out the sentiments of bowhunters regarding crossbows, as the biggest impact would be within those hunting the early archery season.

Again, I am relaying this information from those who had first hand involvement in this. I'll take their word for it, as I have no reason not to trust what they have told me.


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> However, as you may well see, the target audience was not all hunters. The target was the holders of licenses additional to Big Game license. The criteria is that they, the respondents, held an archery license in addition to the Big Game License.


Wrong again.

Read more closely.....
_
"Nearly 6,000 deer hunters were surveyed and 61% of them answered the survey. They were from all parts of the state, and some nonresident hunters were surveyed as well. Bowhunters and muzzleloaders were included as well as *regular firearm season hunters*." [Note: I'm not sure what survey year was being reported on though]_

Regular firearm season hunters means gun only.

Your "facts" are in error - again.


----------



## Free Range

> The 1996 survey was to find out the sentiments of bowhunters regarding crossbows, as the biggest impact would be within those hunting the early archery season.


*Gee don’t tell this to Ace.* When the people affected most, bowhunters, are polled guess what the response is? When you poll the very people that covet the bow season but don't have the self fortitude to learn how to shoot a bow, guess what the response is? Not rocket science now is it?


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Wrong again.
> 
> Read more closely.....
> _
> "Nearly 6,000 deer hunters were surveyed and 61% of them answered the survey. They were from all parts of the state, and some nonresident hunters were surveyed as well. Bowhunters and muzzleloaders were included as well as *regular firearm season hunters*." [Note: I'm not sure what survey year was being reported on though]_
> 
> Regular firearm season hunters means gun only.
> 
> Your "facts" are in error - again.


Ummmm.... Every one of these folks surveyed held a regular big game license. Pre-requisite for getting a bowhunting or ML stamp :doh:

6,000 folks were surveyed with 61% responding. Let's do the math. In 1996 and in 1999 our hunting numbers (big game total) hovered around 670,000. The process for qualifying these folks, Source, was those who held more than simply a Big Game hunting license. The reasons why this was done, and this included the non-residents who also held an archery or ML stamp, logically, was that it was believed hunters with more than the Big Game license demonstrated a tendency to spend more time afield per season than the hunter who solely held the Big Game License, and this is indeed true, as the archery tag opens up nearly another 60 days to hunt.

Questions in this survey were geared to address early archery, regular season and extended season. To get the best qualified answers to the ENTIRE SURVEY, the target was hunters holding more than simply the Big Game license, and this makes sense considering the goals of the survey.

Again, if you all would like to contact some folks who were involved in this effort, please let me know. Jim Snyder has just retired, and I'm sure he can help you out a bit to better understand the mechanics of the surveys. This was not a "plot" against crossbows. This was done for specific reasons and more qualified answers were sought for the entirity of the survey, not simply bits and pieces. The survey wanted hunters with a practical experience hunting early archery, regular season AND extended, not a portion hunting regular season, a portion hunting archery and a portion hunting with ML. :doh:

Source, I hate to say this, but once again, your myopic stance against crossbows has now deluded you into thinking something different concerning the methodologies of two surveys. Had the surveys been designed as you are claiming, we would have seen 60,000 sent out, not 6,000. To get the most informed, best answers, the survey went to the avid hunters, or those holding more than simply the Big Game license.

Again, don't take my word for it, ask the Federations or ask some officials in the NYSCC. I am merely relaying the truth about the history and methodology of the 1996 and, to a lesser extent, 1999 surveys, although each on had differing goals, similar approaches to who the qualified folks wre remained constant.


----------



## ballard

doctariAFC said:


> I'm speaking more towards the 1996 survey. However, as you may well see, the target audience was not all hunters. The target was the holders of licenses additional to Big Game license. The criteria is that they, the respondents, held an archery license in addition to the Big Game License. In NYS you need to have a Big Game license in order to have an archery or ML license. The desired target was those hunters holding the archery stamp as well as the big game license, as the archery stamp afforded you the ability to hunt in the extended season (which is both ML and archery) and the extended season for archery was typically longer (up until 2005 season) that it was for black powder. In terms of the 1999 survey, one of the primary purposes was to gauge whether hunters (archery hunters in specific) would be amicable to expansion of the extended black powder season.
> 
> The 1996 survey was to find out the sentiments of bowhunters regarding crossbows, as the biggest impact would be within those hunting the early archery season.
> 
> Again, I am relaying this information from those who had first hand involvement in this. I'll take their word for it, as I have no reason not to trust what they have told me.


Doc - I still don't think the information you have is accurate. 

First, it would make no sense to poll only bowhunters about xbows, since the majority of the people that would use xbows would be gunhunters not "archers" (Note: Jim, I'm not trying to exclude xbows from archery, just using that term for descriptive purposes. LOL.). 

Second, the 1999 survey's "primary purpose" was not to gauge archers opinion on a proposed expanded ML season. This question was in the survey: "Did you purchase a license that allowed you to hunt for deer in New York state during the 1998 deer hunting season?" This was the extent of the inquiry and was NOT directed towards archer. It also asked: "Did you hunt for deer in NY during the 1997 or 1998 deer hunting seasons?" Thus, if you were a licensed deer hunter - ANY license - then you were fair game for this survey. 

Also, the meat of the 1999 survey did not focus on ML season. That was a part of it, but it asked a variety of questions. One was the opener for the general gun season. Others explored the various ML (as you pointed out) and archery season dates. However, among the items discussed were questions dedicated to xbows. In particular:

Q#19: "Currently, crossbows are not legal for deer hunting in New York state. A proposed change would legalize crossbows during one or more seasons.

a. If it had been legal, would you have hunted deer with a crossbow during either of the last two years? (Gives several options).

b. Which of the following would you support? (Gives several options regarding potential xbow seasons and respondents could check all that applied).

The report stated the results as follows:

"Hunters in favor of. . . 
1. Allowing xbows in the regular season = 9.3%
2. Create a special xbow season = 18.4%
3. Crossbows in the archery season = 27.4%
4. Do not legalize xbows at all = 45.4%"


Without getting into the details and unlike this NY survey, the KY survey did NOT allow the respondents to select what type of expansion they would prefer. Instead, they were given only one choice - full expansion. Only if you said you were "opposed" to full expansion were you allowed to express your preference for some lesser expansion. 

KY's survey was clearly concocted with a full expansion agenda in mind, and it was never designed to determine what the hunters of the state really wanted.


----------



## doctariAFC

ballard said:


> Doc - I still don't think the information you have is accurate.
> 
> First, it would make no sense to poll only bowhunters about xbows, since the majority of the people that would use xbows would be gunhunters not "archers" (Note: Jim, I'm not trying to exclude xbows from archery, just using that term for descriptive purposes. LOL.).
> 
> Second, the 1999 survey's "primary purpose" was not to gauge archers opinion on a proposed expanded ML season. This question was in the survey: "Did you purchase a license that allowed you to hunt for deer in New York state during the 1998 deer hunting season?" This was the extent of the inquiry and was NOT directed towards archer. It also asked: "Did you hunt for deer in NY during the 1997 or 1998 deer hunting seasons?" Thus, if you were a licensed deer hunter - ANY license - then you were fair game for this survey.
> 
> Also, the meat of the 1999 survey did not focus on ML season. That was a part of it, but it asked a variety of questions. One was the opener for the general gun season. Others explored the various ML (as you pointed out) and archery season dates. However, among the items discussed were questions dedicated to xbows. In particular:
> 
> Q#19: "Currently, crossbows are not legal for deer hunting in New York state. A proposed change would legalize crossbows during one or more seasons.
> 
> a. If it had been legal, would you have hunted deer with a crossbow during either of the last two years? (Gives several options).
> 
> b. Which of the following would you support? (Gives several options regarding potential xbow seasons and respondents could check all that applied).
> 
> The report stated the results as follows:
> 
> "Hunters in favor of. . .
> 1. Allowing xbows in the regular season = 9.3%
> 2. Create a special xbow season = 18.4%
> 3. Crossbows in the archery season = 27.4%
> 4. Do not legalize xbows at all = 45.4%"
> 
> 
> Without getting into the details and unlike this NY survey, the KY survey did NOT allow the respondents to select what type of expansion they would prefer. Instead, they were given only one choice - full expansion. Only if you said you were "opposed" to full expansion were you allowed to express your preference for some lesser expansion.
> 
> KY's survey was clearly concocted with a full expansion agenda in mind, and it was never designed to determine what the hunters of the state really wanted.


Actually, my information is dead on the money, at least in the context of NYS and the methodologies of the surveys in 1996 and 1999. Are you from NY? You do realize that in order to get a bowhunting stamp you also must have a Big Game license? This was true for non-residents as well during that time (although this pre-requisite changed for bowhunters in 2002 with the advent of DECALS).

See my last post to this as to why this was done. The methodology was logical as the desired participant was someone who could hunt ALL big game seasons in NYS. Someone with a Big Game license only could not complete the entire survey, as they had no legal ability to hunt early and extended without an archery stamp. Pretty darned simple to understand, isn't it? :doh:


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Ummmm.... Every one of these folks surveyed held a regular big game license. Pre-requisite for getting a bowhunting or ML stamp :doh:
> 
> The process for qualifying these folks, Source, was those who held more than simply a Big Game hunting license.


I understand what you are trying to say, you are just wrong. I have the report from Cornell (therefore I have the facts, even though you continue to spew your crap that I have no facts)

Here's what the Cornell Researchers say about their sample:
*
Mail Survey
Sample Selection
We selected a random sample of 5,323 1997 New York State deer hunters, including people who bought senior licenses, big game licenses, sportsman licenses, junior archery licenses, and one or more nonresident licenses (combination, big game, bowhunting, and/or muzzleloading).*

You cannot argue with that. Can you? 



doctariAFC said:


> The reasons why this was done, and this included the non-residents who also held an archery or ML stamp, logically, was that it was believed hunters with more than the Big Game license demonstrated a tendency to spend more time afield per season than the hunter who solely held the Big Game License, and this is indeed true, as the archery tag opens up nearly another 60 days to hunt.


Since you are wrong about the sample, this speculation is also wrong. ALL hunter types were included in the survey, and it has nothing to do with time spent in the field.



doctariAFC said:


> Questions in this survey were geared to address early archery, regular season and extended season. To get the best qualified answers to the ENTIRE SURVEY, the target was hunters holding more than simply the Big Game license, and this makes sense considering the goals of the survey.


Wrong again.



doctariAFC said:


> Again, if you all would like to contact some folks who were involved in this effort, please let me know. Jim Snyder has just retired, and I'm sure he can help you out a bit to better understand the mechanics of the surveys. This was not a "plot" against crossbows. This was done for specific reasons and more qualified answers were sought for the entirity of the survey, not simply bits and pieces. The survey wanted hunters with a practical experience hunting early archery, regular season AND extended, not a portion hunting regular season, a portion hunting archery and a portion hunting with ML. :doh:.


I'm sure you are getting the message by now - wrong again. Since the sample included Junior Archery license holders (who can only hunt with a bow when they are 14-15), its pretty obvious that they were not looking just for "hunters with a practical experience hunting early archery, regular season AND extended."



doctariAFC said:


> Source, I hate to say this, but once again, your myopic stance against crossbows has now deluded you into thinking something different concerning the methodologies of two surveys.


TOTALLY inaccurate. I never claimed there was anything wrong with EITHER survey, rather I have been making fun of the hypocritical know it alls.



doctariAFC said:


> To get the most informed, best answers, the survey went to the avid hunters, or those holding more than simply the Big Game license.


Already proven absolutely false.



doctariAFC said:


> Again, don't take my word for it, ask the Federations or ask some officials in the NYSCC. I am merely relaying the truth about the history and methodology of the 1996 and, to a lesser extent, 1999 surveys, although each on had differing goals, similar approaches to who the qualified folks wre remained constant.


You are not relaying truth - you are perpetuating falsehood. 

I do not need to ask anyone for second and third hand information, I HAVE the Cornell Report. And I would not want to look as foolish as you do for regurgitating false information.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> *Gee don’t tell this to Ace.* When the people affected most, bowhunters, are polled guess what the response is? When you poll the very people that covet the bow season but don't have the self fortitude to learn how to shoot a bow, guess what the response is? Not rocket science now is it?



still the same insulting nonsense. actually people who want to use a crossbow are affected the most and "bowhunters" not in the least.

I like your smarmy attitude about fortitude-its that BS sense of entitlement and elitism that infects the PBS again.

Tell me-how much money have you earned from Bowhunting Free Range?


----------



## ballard

doctariAFC said:


> Actually, my information is dead on the money, at least in the context of NYS and the methodologies of the surveys in 1996 and 1999. Are you from NY? You do realize that in order to get a bowhunting stamp you also must have a Big Game license? This was true for non-residents as well during that time (although this pre-requisite changed for bowhunters in 2002 with the advent of DECALS).
> 
> See my last post to this as to why this was done. The methodology was logical as the desired participant was someone who could hunt ALL big game seasons in NYS. Someone with a Big Game license only could not complete the entire survey, as they had no legal ability to hunt early and extended without an archery stamp. Pretty darned simple to understand, isn't it? :doh:


No, I'm not from NY and know nothing about the purpose of these surveys (other what's stated in them) or NY's game laws. I don't know if I have the 1996 survey or not (since I have 1 that is undated).

After reading the 1999 survey though, it doesn't appear to me as though they were only polling bowhunters and xbow season expansion was definitely of equal importance as the ML seasons. The questions don't get any more specific than asking whether you hold a big game license and/or hunted in 1997 and 1998. That's it. Unless they pre-screened people, there was no way for them to single out bowhunters, and if they did pre-screen people, they wouldn't have bothered to ask them whether they held a big game license (since that would have been the factor they screened for). 

I'm not trying to argue the merits of NY's surveys or their purpose. I'll leave that for you NY guys to debate, but I thought I'd mention this stuff since I happened to have some hard copies on hand.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> I understand what you are trying to say, you are just wrong. I have the report from Cornell (therefore I have the facts, even though you continue to spew your crap that I have no facts)
> 
> Here's what the Cornell Researchers say about their sample:
> *
> Mail Survey
> Sample Selection
> We selected a random sample of 5,323 1997 New York State deer hunters, including people who bought senior licenses, big game licenses, sportsman licenses, junior archery licenses, and one or more nonresident licenses (combination, big game, bowhunting, and/or muzzleloading).*
> 
> You cannot argue with that. Can you?
> 
> 
> 
> Since you are wrong about the sample, this speculation is also wrong. ALL hunter types were included in the survey, and it has nothing to do with time spent in the field.
> 
> 
> 
> Wrong again.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure you are getting the message by now - wrong again. Since the sample included Junior Archery license holders (who can only hunt with a bow when they are 14-15), its pretty obvious that they were not looking just for "hunters with a practical experience hunting early archery, regular season AND extended."
> 
> 
> 
> TOTALLY inaccurate. I never claimed there was anything wrong with EITHER survey, rather I have been making fun of the hypocritical know it alls.
> 
> 
> 
> Already proven absolutely false.
> 
> 
> 
> You are not relaying truth - you are perpetuating falsehood.
> 
> I do not need to ask anyone for second and third hand information, I HAVE the Cornell Report. And I would not want to look as foolish as you do for regurgitating false information.


Believe what you want Source. I'll trust those who were involved with this over you..... Sorry, but that's the truth...


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Believe what you want Source. I'll trust those who were involved with this over you..... Sorry, but that's the truth...


Continue to be wrong and have the truth stuffed back down the pipe every time you misspeak, then. The Cornell researchers who conducted the survey and wrote the actual report I am reading were ultimately involved - don't you think?

Let's go double or nothing. What did say the entire focus of the 1999 survey was?


----------



## ballard

Marvin said:


> *61.880 DENIAL OF INSPECTION; ROLE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL*
> 
> (1) If a person enforces KRS 61.870 to 61.884 pursuant to this section, he shall begin enforcement under this subsection before proceeding to enforcement under subsection (2) of this section. Each public agency, upon any request for records made under KRS 61.870 to 61.884, shall determine within three (3) days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, after the receipt of any such request whether to comply with the request and shall notify in writing the person making the request, within the three (3) day period, of its decision. An agency response denying, in whole or in part, inspection of any record shall include a statement of the specific exception authorizing the withholding of the record and a brief explanation of how the exception applies to the record withheld. The response shall be issued by the official custodian or under his authority, and it shall constitute final agency action.
> (2) (a) If a complaining party wishes the Attorney General to review a public agency's denial of a request to inspect a public record, the complaining party shall forward to the Attorney General a copy of the written request and a copy of the written response denying inspection. If the public agency refuses to provide a written response, a complaining party shall provide a copy of the written request. The Attorney General shall review the request and denial and issue within twenty (20) days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays, a written decision stating whether the agency violated provisions of KRS 61.870 to 61.884.
> (b) In unusual circumstances, the Attorney General may extend the twenty (20) day time limit by sending written notice to the complaining party and a copy to the denying agency, setting forth the reasons for the extension, and the day on which a decision is expected to be issued, which shall not exceed an additional thirty (30) work days, excepting Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays. As used in this section, "unusual circumstances" means, but only to the extent reasonably necessary to the proper resolution of an appeal:
> 1. The need to obtain additional documentation from the agency or a copy of the records involved;
> 2. The need to conduct extensive research on issues of first impression; or
> 3. An unmanageable increase in the number of appeals received by the Attorney General.
> (c) On the day that the Attorney General renders his decision, he shall mail a copy to the agency and a copy to the person who requested the record in question. The burden of proof in sustaining the action shall rest with the agency, and the Attorney General may request additional documentation from the agency for substantiation. The Attorney General may also request a copy of the records involved but they shall not be disclosed.
> (3) Each agency shall notify the Attorney General of any actions filed against that agency in Circuit Court regarding the enforcement of KRS 61.870 to 61.884. The Attorney General shall not, however, be named as a party in any Circuit Court actions regarding the enforcement of KRS 61.870 to 61.884, nor shall he have any duty to defend his decision in Circuit Court or any subsequent proceedings.
> (4) If a person feels the intent of KRS 61.870 to 61.884 is being subverted by an agency short of denial of inspection, including but not limited to the imposition of excessive fees or the misdirection of the applicant, the person may complain in writing to the Attorney General, and the complaint shall be subject to the same adjudicatory process as if the record had been denied.
> (5) (a) A party shall have thirty (30) days from the day that the Attorney General renders his decision to appeal the decision. An appeal within the thirty (30) day time limit shall be treated as if it were an action brought under KRS 61.882.
> (b) If an appeal is not filed within the thirty (30) day time limit, the Attorney General's decision shall have the force and effect of law and shall be enforceable in the Circuit Court of the county where the public agency has its principal place of business or the Circuit Court of the county where the public record is maintained.


Thanks for the free research, Marvin. I was actually aware of this mechanism, but, given our circumstances, I chose not to do so at that time.


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> Thanks for the free research, Marvin. I was actually aware of this mechanism, but, given our circumstances, I chose not to do so at that time.


No problem Ballard! Just trying to help out. Let me knwo what you find if you decide to press the issue with them.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Continue to be wrong and have the truth stuffed back down the pipe every time you misspeak, then. The Cornell researchers who conducted the survey and wrote the actual report I am reading were ultimately involved - don't you think?
> 
> Let's go double or nothing. What did say the entire focus of the 1999 survey was?


Well, this one is from memory, as I do not have the survey on the computer I am currently using, but it was to gauge hunter attitude in terms of addressing increased extended season opportunities, expansion of early season archery to allow more opportunity and to get a gauge on lifestyle changes concerning regular season and the potential acceptance of changing opening day from Monday to Saturday, not to mention license structure and examining the reduction of age limits for big game hunting. But that is just from memory.

Incidentally, since I personally know the people who crafted the 1996 survey, you know, those who were INVOLVED with it, I'll trust my information, but thanks... Believe what you want to believe.


----------



## thesource

Please understand. From our personal communications, I think you are probably a great guy. But on the public board, you come across as an arrogant and obnoxious know-it-all.

That is why I get a certain amount of enjoyment when I can "put you on front street." or make you look like a donkey if you prefer.

This is how you answered my direct challenge as o the purpose of the 1999 NY survey:



doctariAFC said:


> Well, this one is from memory, as I do not have the survey on the computer I am currently using, but it was to gauge hunter attitude in terms of addressing increased extended season opportunities, expansion of early season archery to allow more opportunity and to get a gauge on lifestyle changes concerning regular season and the potential acceptance of changing opening day from Monday to Saturday, not to mention license structure and examining the reduction of age limits for big game hunting. But that is just from memory.


And this is how you originally stated your interpretation:



doctariAFC said:


> In terms of the 1999 survey, one of the primary purposes was to gauge whether hunters (archery hunters in specific) would be amicable to expansion of the extended black powder season.



Hmmmmmm. Interesting difference of opinion when you have been called out to provide the facts. Allow me, straight from the Cornell report. Why speculate, when you can get the FACTS straight from thesource:
_
New York State Bureau of Wildlife (BOW) biologists identified the specific proposed
regulatory changes we presented to hunters. These proposed regulations would:
• continue to allow Sunday hunting in western New York;
• increase the number of days on which Southern Zone bow hunters could use deer management permits (DMPs) during the early archery season;
• allow hunters to transfer or consign unused DMPs to other hunters;
• allow deer of either sex to be taken during the Southern Zone muzzleloader season;
• set opening day of the regular season in relation to Thanksgiving, so that it always occurred either the Monday of the week before Thanksgiving or the Monday of Thanksgiving week;
• legalize crossbows during the regular season, the archery seasons, and/or a new special season;
• allow muzzleloader hunters to use telescopic scopes (optical sights) during
muzzleloader season; and
• separate the late archery and muzzleloader seasons (so that they do not overlap) and/or extend the length of these seasons._


It seems they had a lot more on their plate than just "to gauge whether hunters (archery hunters in specific) would be amicable to expansion of the extended black powder season ", which is the inference from your first post,


FACTS, which you try to suggest are only on your side (over and over), are kicking your butt right now, Doc.


Heee-hawww.:darkbeer:


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Please understand. From our personal communications, I think you are probably a great guy. But on the public board, you come across as an arrogant and obnoxious know-it-all.
> 
> That is why I get a certain amount of enjoyment when I can "put you on front street." or make you look like a donkey if you prefer.
> 
> This is how you answered my direct challenge as o the purpose of the 1999 NY survey:
> 
> 
> 
> And this is how you originally stated your interpretation:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmmmm. Interesting difference of opinion when you have been called out to provide the facts. Allow me, straight from the Cornell report. Why speculate, when you can get the FACTS straight from thesource:
> _
> New York State Bureau of Wildlife (BOW) biologists identified the specific proposed
> regulatory changes we presented to hunters. These proposed regulations would:
> • continue to allow Sunday hunting in western New York;
> • increase the number of days on which Southern Zone bow hunters could use deer management permits (DMPs) during the early archery season;
> • allow hunters to transfer or consign unused DMPs to other hunters;
> • allow deer of either sex to be taken during the Southern Zone muzzleloader season;
> • set opening day of the regular season in relation to Thanksgiving, so that it always occurred either the Monday of the week before Thanksgiving or the Monday of Thanksgiving week;
> • legalize crossbows during the regular season, the archery seasons, and/or a new special season;
> • allow muzzleloader hunters to use telescopic scopes (optical sights) during
> muzzleloader season; and
> • separate the late archery and muzzleloader seasons (so that they do not overlap) and/or extend the length of these seasons._
> 
> 
> It seems they had a lot more on their plate than just "to gauge whether hunters (archery hunters in specific) would be amicable to expansion of the extended black powder season ", which is the inference from your first post,
> 
> 
> FACTS, which you try to suggest are only on your side (over and over), are kicking your butt right now, Doc.
> 
> 
> Heee-hawww.:darkbeer:


Again, I had to go back in the archives... So apologies for not having all the exact specifics, but, again, I was speaking to the methodologies of the survey in 1996. The survey - The Future of Hunting, conducted in 1999 was more comprehensive, but still encompassed a similar pool of folks (multi-license holders) as the best gauge of complete information possible.

Here, this is the statement which the DEC put forth concerning the 1999 survey and the objectives of the DEC based on the results...

http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/deer/fodhupd1.htm

You will note, the priorities evolved...


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> The survey - The Future of Hunting, conducted in 1999 was more comprehensive, but still encompassed a similar pool of folks (multi-license holders) as the best gauge of complete information possible.


Ohhhhh .... Shame on you. I have already provided BULLETPROOF data that shows the survey was composed of ALL hunters, not just multi-license holders. You have intentionally crossed the line from misrepresentation to lying.



doctariAFC said:


> Here, this is the statement which the DEC put forth concerning the 1999 survey and the objectives of the DEC based on the results...
> http://www.dec.state.ny.us/website/dfwmr/wildlife/deer/fodhupd1.htm
> You will note, the priorities evolved...


 

You are kidding, right?

You post a DEC statement from 2002. This is not what the 1999 survey was determining...This is what the 1999 survey determined for the DEC.

You can't spin this, you have been EXPOSED.

Heeeee - hawwwww.:darkbeer:


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Ohhhhh .... Shame on you. I have already provided BULLETPROOF data that shows the survey was composed of ALL hunters, not just multi-license holders. You have intentionally crossed the line from misrepresentation to lying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are kidding, right?
> 
> You post a DEC statement from 2002. This is not what the 1999 survey was determining...This is what the 1999 survey determined for the DEC.
> 
> You can't spin this, you have been EXPOSED.
> 
> Heeeee - hawwwww.:darkbeer:


Silly Source... You buy every intention of a survey at the onset?

What would you like to know about these surveys. What would you like to know about the current NYSCC survey concerning QDM? Do you want the company line, or do you want the inside, behind the scenes stuff?

What I am relaying is the behind the scenes stuff Source.... You can trot out the propaganda. I will not say what you have published is not accurate as it was sold to us. What I am relaying is simply the information from the folks who were involved in this survey from beginning to end. Some of the info comes from folks that were pretty ticked off about the end result (meaning how the survey was used). Some of these folks split from the NYSCC and formed CANY. The politics of hunting and fishinjg in NYS goes a lot deeper and gets a lot uglier than the pretty little picture that was sold to you and me.

The 1999 survey (let's keep it consistent, as the 1996 survey was a complete disaster) was truly geared to accomplish one major change, DECALS. In the process, through the responses and some comments made by key players in a few Eastern NY regions, was the start of the concept of QDM, a look at attempting to get ML injected in the middle of early archery season, lowering the hunting ages for archery and regular season, etc.

What would you like to know. I can speak relatively freely about the "dirt" and the desires of former State-level officials.


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Silly Source... You buy every intention of a survey at the onset?
> 
> What would you like to know about these surveys. What would you like to know about the current NYSCC survey concerning QDM? Do you want the company line, or do you want the inside, behind the scenes stuff?
> 
> What I am relaying is the behind the scenes stuff Source.... You can trot out the propaganda. I will not say what you have published is not accurate as it was sold to us. What I am relaying is simply the information from the folks who were involved in this survey from beginning to end. Some of the info comes from folks that were pretty ticked off about the end result (meaning how the survey was used). Some of these folks split from the NYSCC and formed CANY. The politics of hunting and fishinjg in NYS goes a lot deeper and gets a lot uglier than the pretty little picture that was sold to you and me.
> 
> The 1999 survey (let's keep it consistent, as the 1996 survey was a complete disaster) was truly geared to accomplish one major change, DECALS. In the process, through the responses and some comments made by key players in a few Eastern NY regions, was the start of the concept of QDM, a look at attempting to get ML injected in the middle of early archery season, lowering the hunting ages for archery and regular season, etc.
> 
> What would you like to know. I can speak relatively freely about the "dirt" and the desires of former State-level officials.



No.

I am not interested in your post-sourcenuke spin.

You had your chance to come clean and you didn't.

Your "facts" have been trashed, your credibility is aflame, and you look like a complete jackass.

Mission accomplished.

I had considered posting the 1999 Cornell report for all to see, but I figure I should hang onto it in case I need a few more giggles. You all can find it if you work for it....if you are not too LAZY...lol.

Cheers!:darkbeer:


----------



## Jim C

Polls are meaningless in most cases-regulations should be based on facts and what is right-not how people feel


----------



## JavaMan

thesource said:


> No.
> 
> I am not interested in your post-sourcenuke spin.
> 
> You had your chance to come clean and you didn't.
> 
> *Your "facts" have been trashed, your credibility is aflame, and you look like a complete jackass.
> 
> Mission accomplished.*
> 
> I had considered posting the 1999 Cornell report for all to see, but I figure I should hang onto it in case I need a few more giggles. You all can find it if you work for it....if you are not too LAZY...lol.
> 
> Cheers!:darkbeer:


Mr Source is such a nice guy.

the only person who is thought of as a _jackass_ is the person who wrote the above diatribe.

JavaMan


----------



## spec

Java- you are certainly welcome to weigh-in on this subject. Why only post to attack an individual? No has has attacked you. You have 10 big posts and all you can do is personal attacks?


----------



## Jim C

spec said:


> Java- you are certainly welcome to weigh-in on this subject. Why only post to attack an individual? No has has attacked you. You have 10 big posts and all you can do is personal attacks?


actually I believe the source claimed this poster was a former banned poster
Not all of Java's posts have attacked Source-I believe his first few posts were asking questions about KY


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> No.
> 
> I am not interested in your post-sourcenuke spin.
> 
> You had your chance to come clean and you didn't.
> 
> Your "facts" have been trashed, your credibility is aflame, and you look like a complete jackass.
> 
> Mission accomplished.
> 
> I had considered posting the 1999 Cornell report for all to see, but I figure I should hang onto it in case I need a few more giggles. You all can find it if you work for it....if you are not too LAZY...lol.
> 
> Cheers!:darkbeer:




You crack me up.

Ok, Source, answer this question concerning the 1999 survey (oh, and also bear in mind the conversation began about the 1996 survey, but, nevermind that one, as that is a key point you have failed to observe)

Answer the question I pose. What was the purpose and intent of the 1999 survey. You will not successfully answer that question, because you are completely clueless. Once you stumble about a bit, I shall give you the chilling truth.


----------



## Free Range

> Tell me-how much money have you earned from Bowhunting Free Range?


Excuse me? What business is that of yours? How much money have you earned from defending scumbags that you knew were guilty?


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Excuse me? What business is that of yours? How much money have you earned from defending scumbags that you knew were guilty?



not many-I am not a criminal defense attorney. I did some traffic defense my first few years out of law school. Now back to the question-how can a group call itself "PROFESSIONAL BOW HUNTERS" unless they derive income from that. Does that make them liars or merely mercenaries?:wink:


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Answer the question I pose. What was the purpose and intent of the 1999 survey. You will not successfully answer that question, because you are completely clueless. Once you stumble about a bit, I shall give you the chilling truth.


Well, here;s the one and only reason that you gave before:


doctariAFC said:


> The 1999 survey (let's keep it consistent, as the 1996 survey was a complete disaster) was truly geared to accomplish one major change, DECALS.


Note that YOU pinned it to the 99 survey here, so its not really a matter of me failing to observe anything.

To answer your question, let's go to the Cornell report and find out why it was performed, shall we? Why guess, after all, when we can go thesource.
Here are the stated objectives of the study:

*• measure whether hunters would support or oppose various proposed deer hunting regulations;
• determine whether hunters would participate in the opportunities provided by these regulations;
• identify the reasons hunters support or oppose regulations; and
• assess whether and how information included as part of a mail survey influences hunters' opinions.*

And here are the Regulations that the State asked them to investigate:

*• continue to allow Sunday hunting in western New York;
• increase the number of days on which Southern Zone bow hunters could use deer management permits (DMPs) during the early archery season;
• allow hunters to transfer or consign unused DMPs to other hunters;
• allow deer of either sex to be taken during the Southern Zone muzzleloader season;
• set opening day of the regular season in relation to Thanksgiving, so that it always occurred either the Monday of the week before Thanksgiving or the Monday of Thanksgiving week;
• legalize crossbows during the regular season, the archery seasons, and/or a new special season;
• allow muzzleloader hunters to use telescopic scopes (optical sights) during
muzzleloader season; and
• separate the late archery and muzzleloader seasons (so that they do not overlap) and/or extend the length of these seasons.*


Eagerly awaiting your spin.


----------



## Free Range

> how can a group call itself "PROFESSIONAL BOW HUNTERS" unless they derive income from that. Does that make them liars or merely mercenaries?


Well I would expect a question like this from you. You constantly smear and insult without knowing what you are talking about. It’s really not that hard to look things up before you open your mouth for all to see the ignorance you possess. I will not answer this for you, but here is a hint the word professional can be used in more then one context.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Well I would expect a question like this from you. You constantly smear and insult without knowing what you are talking about. It’s really not that hard to look things up before you open your mouth for all to see the ignorance you possess. I will not answer this for you, but here is a hint the word professional can be used in more then one context.



I know what the pBS stands for when it comes to xbows-it stands for lies, exclusion, bigotry, slander of other hunters and disinformation. Their very name is a lie and is based on an arrogant assumption that they are the "elite" in a recreational activity.


----------



## Free Range

Again Jim you boldly show your colors, I have to give you that, you really don’t care that everyone here knows your only weapon is smear campaign, and insults. Must be living to close to the flame. Being a lawyer, and one that can’t intelligently argue a case, I would guess you spend a lot of time hanging around politicians. 

Thanks for the help against the xb, what we need is more people like you, the xb would be history in know time. LOL


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Again Jim you boldly show your colors, I have to give you that, you really don’t care that everyone here knows your only weapon is smear campaign, and insults. Must be living to close to the flame. Being a lawyer, and one that can’t intelligently argue a case, I would guess you spend a lot of time hanging around politicians.
> 
> Thanks for the help against the xb, what we need is more people like you, the xb would be history in know time. LOL


you are a lying again-its people like you who engage in SMEAR campaigns with your insults of thousands of other archery season hunters-SMEARS that the odious PBS perpetrates. I have posted all sorts of facts countering the LIES the PBS spews and you side with the lies. Its your side that calls people "lazy" "slobs" "cheaters" etc, not mine


actually we keep winning free range as the tides of selfishness and self serving nonsense continues to lose. When people fully are exposed to the facts and it comes down to a choice between 1) letting more people enjoy a recreational activity vs 2) massaging the egos of arrogant elitists I know how people are going to choose

You can whine about my arguing skills all you want but you and your small group of fellow travelers have yet to score any objective points because all you can do is pss and moan that "its not a bow" or WE ARE MORE ENTITLED

how do I know I am right? because your sainted PBS-rather than have sound arguments on their website-had to post crap such as the claim that xbows SHOOT AT ALMOST TWICE THE SPEED as most compound bows or the pathetic garbage that my mom could pick up my excalibur and beat most of the compound target archers in this country.

we all know its lies and the fact that the PBS had to purvey lies in support of its anti xbow jihad proves that they didn't think there were any FACTS that actually supported their claim

lets look at another one of their disinformation actions. They whined that OHIO has been "taken over" by crossbows without admitting that bag limits, time of the season, etc have not been changed -but actually, (bag limits) INCREASED since xbows were legalized. They want their weak minded minions to think that something nefarious has happened to compound archers in ohio because there are now more xbow archery hunters than compound archers.

Then we have PBS claiming that xbows are for people who aren't willing (to bow at the feet of the PBS) to "do it the hard way"-again an arrogant and elitist pack of psychobabble.


----------



## Free Range

> you are a lying again-its people like you who engage in SMEAR campaigns with your insults of thousands of other archery season hunters-SMEARS that the odious PBS perpetrates. I have posted all sorts of facts countering the LIES the PBS spews and you side with the lies. Its your side that calls people "lazy" "slobs" "cheaters" etc, not mine


No, you call hunters, bigots, liars, jihad, etc, etc, and you do it in nearly every post you submit. You talk about Source only posting on xb threads and not contributing anything. Well you need to look in the mirror, you are the most consistent poster of smear and insults here. We give your side a jab every now and then, but you insult with nearly every poet. Why is that Jim, could it be you have a losing case and the only recourse you have left is to further inflate your ego, buy being the best at insulting others? 

And as for the rest of your post, see above, tactics of a loser.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> No, you call hunters, bigots, liars, jihad, etc, etc, and you do it in nearly every post you submit. You talk about Source only posting on xb threads and not contributing anything. Well you need to look in the mirror, you are the most consistent poster of smear and insults here. We give your side a jab every now and then, but you insult with nearly every poet. Why is that Jim, could it be you have a losing case and the only recourse you have left is to further inflate your ego, buy being the best at insulting others?
> 
> And as for the rest of your post, see above, tactics of a loser.


 You are lying again-I only lambaste those who lie and insult other hunters. I don't attack people based on what sort of bow they use. There are good ethical hunters using every possible type of legal hunting bow, there are bad hunters using xbows, etc. To make assumptions and then ridicule a person because they choose a weapon that is more easily mastered as being lazy is idiotic and using the PBS logic, we could claim that anyone who uses a compound bow in a state where that is the easiest legal weapon fall under the same cloud that your PBS casts upon xbow archers in the states like ohio.

How am I losing free range? I didn't have to start an organization designed to oppose xbows like Poop and Dung did. I don't have to claim that xbows are the most serious threat to bowhunting


I didn't come to AT to whine about xbows and I post on far more subjects than this including coaching people. you and source are mostly here to whine about xbows


----------



## KY MUSTANG

Free Range said:


> No, you call hunters, bigots, liars, jihad, etc, etc, and you do it in nearly every post you submit. You talk about Source only posting on xb threads and not contributing anything. Well you need to look in the mirror, you are the most consistent poster of smear and insults here. We give your side a jab every now and then, but you insult with nearly every poet. Why is that Jim, could it be you have a losing case and the only recourse you have left is to further inflate your ego, buy being the best at insulting others?
> 
> And as for the rest of your post, see above, tactics of a loser.


 Excellent post very very truthful.:cocktail:


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> Excellent post very very truthful.:cocktail:


LOL Free Range has a mini-me


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Well, here;s the one and only reason that you gave before:
> 
> 
> Note that YOU pinned it to the 99 survey here, so its not really a matter of me failing to observe anything.
> 
> To answer your question, let's go to the Cornell report and find out why it was performed, shall we? Why guess, after all, when we can go thesource.
> Here are the stated objectives of the study:
> 
> *• measure whether hunters would support or oppose various proposed deer hunting regulations;
> • determine whether hunters would participate in the opportunities provided by these regulations;
> • identify the reasons hunters support or oppose regulations; and
> • assess whether and how information included as part of a mail survey influences hunters' opinions.*
> 
> And here are the Regulations that the State asked them to investigate:
> 
> *• continue to allow Sunday hunting in western New York;
> • increase the number of days on which Southern Zone bow hunters could use deer management permits (DMPs) during the early archery season;
> • allow hunters to transfer or consign unused DMPs to other hunters;
> • allow deer of either sex to be taken during the Southern Zone muzzleloader season;
> • set opening day of the regular season in relation to Thanksgiving, so that it always occurred either the Monday of the week before Thanksgiving or the Monday of Thanksgiving week;
> • legalize crossbows during the regular season, the archery seasons, and/or a new special season;
> • allow muzzleloader hunters to use telescopic scopes (optical sights) during
> muzzleloader season; and
> • separate the late archery and muzzleloader seasons (so that they do not overlap) and/or extend the length of these seasons.*
> 
> 
> Eagerly awaiting your spin.


Try again.


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Try again.


No. I have given you the one and only possible answer to your question, straight from the source.

Stop playing games.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> No. I have given you the one and only possible answer to your question, straight from the source.
> 
> Stop playing games.



why don't you stop playing games and tell us why the non harmful desire of citizens to participate in a recreational activity ought to be denied because of your sense of "tradition" and self worth.

hunting seasons exist to serve the public not the other way around


----------



## ballard

Is there an ignore feature on this website????


----------



## Jim C

ballard said:


> Is there an ignore feature on this website????


yes, its easy to use. me, I merely skip over posts I don't want to read. I prefer to see how the anti's are feeling myself.


----------



## KidKy24

Jim C said:


> You are lying again-I only lambaste those who lie and insult other hunters. I don't attack people based on what sort of bow they use. There are good ethical hunters using every possible type of legal hunting bow, there are bad hunters using xbows, etc. To make assumptions and then ridicule a person because they choose a weapon that is more easily mastered as being lazy is idiotic and using the PBS logic, we could claim that anyone who uses a compound bow in a state where that is the easiest legal weapon fall under the same cloud that your PBS casts upon xbow archers in the states like ohio.
> 
> How am I losing free range? I didn't have to start an organization designed to oppose xbows like Poop and Dung did. I don't have to claim that xbows are the most serious threat to bowhunting
> 
> 
> I didn't come to AT to whine about xbows and I post on far more subjects than this including coaching people. you and source are mostly here to whine about xbows




amen brother!! whole lot of good stuff here jimc!!:wink:


----------



## KidKy24

thesource said:


> Please understand. From our personal communications, I think you are probably a great guy. But on the public board, you come across as an arrogant and obnoxious know-it-all.
> 
> 
> 
> FACTS, which you try to suggest are only on your side (over and over), are kicking your butt right now, Doc.
> 
> 
> Heee-hawww.:darkbeer:



quite possibly the WORST example of a pot calling the kettle black i have ever seen. OMG, speechless ukey:


----------



## doctariAFC

KidKy24 said:


> quite possibly the WORST example of a pot calling the kettle black i have ever seen. OMG, speechless ukey:


:chortle:

No doubt.... But that's alright. Kinda what I have to contend with being on the front lines fighting to protect even thesource's hunting and fishing rights in NYS.

Since he hasn't been here to "Try Again" with what the 1999 Future of NY Hunting Survey was really all about, I'll tell everyone, and I hope folks put their thinking caps on and understand the very sinister truth about what I am about to reveal. The truth can sometimes be ugly, but it nonetheless must be known and learned from.

All of what Source listed above were far from the ultimate objectives of this "survey". Rather, what Source listed are clearly defined in one terms.... BONES. Throw the hunters some bones to distract from the very real objectives the prior DEC regime had.

The big end result of the 1999 Future of Hunting survey was the DECALS licensing system. Sure, we got a new tag structure (which many, including myself, have some severe issues with), some longer time afield (like an additional 7 days) and saw a moderation in black powder legal equipment (now can use scopes and in-lines). Bones. THe real reason behind all this was to establish a database of sportsmen for two purposes, as follows:

1 - Stronger Child Support payment enforcement
2 - Database of hunters/ gun owners

On part 1, the database is dynamic and relatively simple to access. Finding dead-beat Dads who are hunters or anglers is now much easier, as, and funny as it may seem, a dead beat Dad will not report address changes to the DMV, but he sure will to the DEC so he can get that DMP in the mail!

On part 2, firearms owners, this was the ultimate desire of the last DEC regime. Fortunately, legislation demanding law enforcement receive access to this database - whenever they saw fit - was stalled long enough for a new regime to come in. The State Assmebly attempted to pass a law compelling release of this database to the AG (Elliott "I want to take your guns away" Spitzer), and it got destroyed in the Senate, blasted by Commissioner Sheehan, and the Governor even was dismayed by the plan, as a clear violation of privacy rights.

YOu wanted to know what the 1999 survey was intended to accomplish? That's it, in a nutshell. Certainly didn't improve game reporting and measurements. Quite the opposite. We issue more tags, and have a spiffy phone in system to report harvests. Since 2002, the year DECALS was introduced, deer harvest reporting compliance has dropped by an estimated 40%. Consigning DMPs to other hunters, something that was illegal prior to DECALS (another bone) has caused a higher than desired antlerless harvest in many, many DMPs, partially resulting in a 35% cut in DMP issuances for the 2005 season. The additional buck tag given to archers and black powder hunters as a means to pacify hunters enraged by the substantial license fee increases that cam along with DECALS has hunters now screaming for some sort of QDM.

If you're a Star Wars fan, and you examine what has been transpiring, you get an eerie sense that Darth Sidious, the Sith Lord, is pulling some of the strings, while guys like source go on completely fooled by what has been happening. This is partly driven by the ARAs and partly by the Brady Bunch types. All of which come from NYC and Eastern NY - Just look at the QDM pilot program - Region 3 - Eastern NY. 2 WMUs were to run a test on AR of 3 points or better on one beam. First season for this was 2005. This is a pilot program, right? Then why on earth would anyoe wish to expand this to another 2 WMUs after only one season? Why not wait two or three seasons, when you will be able to observe and measure some success before attempting to expand it?

Some things to think about, long and hard.

That's your inside information for the day. Enjoy it....

Rich Davenport


----------



## Free Range

Good information, Doc, but how is that connected with any of this? We are all glad to have someone “on the inside” but you can’t present “insider” information as facts. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but the only facts, as outlined by you and Ace, that matter are provable, documented, and repeatable data. Now where was this headed anyway, talking about surveys, and how one is reliable and the other isn’t. Oh yeah I remember now, so how does any of this affect the claim that one survey done by Cornell is Gospel, and the other is slanted, twisted and has no bearing?


----------



## Free Range

> amen brother!! whole lot of good stuff here jimc!!


The blind being lead by the blind :asleep:


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> The blind being lead by the blind :asleep:


its kind of like the moonbats who call Bush "stupid" only to continually get their arses handed to them by him.

Your pathetic defense of the Marlow report did to your remaining credibility what the Enola Gay's bombing run did to Hiroshima


----------



## dalebow

Good GOd give it a rest, you got from Oct 1 -NOv something then thru the end of December, The United Bowhunters of KY didnt like the way it was handled, we could care less about sharing the woods. If the only reason you are not in the woods was because you couldnt use an x- bow during the bow seaon thats your fault, buy a bow!!! You could always get a medical waiver for a crossbow and it was pretty easy to get!! Now that your 44 day season has been expanded to over 100 days give it a rest and quit whining about what did or didnt happen. 

I hunt with longbows, recurves, compound, rifle and muzzleloader, I dont care if you are in the woods or not and if you didnt hunt because you were to lazy until you could use the crossbow you wont be where I hike into at 4am to get away from the crowds on the Public Land in KY anyway!

Blah, Blah, Blah while you are *****ing I will be souting


----------



## Jim C

dalebow said:


> Good GOd give it a rest, you got from Oct 1 -NOv something then thru the end of December, The United Bowhunters of KY didnt like the way it was handled, we could care less about sharing the woods. If the only reason you are not in the woods was because you couldnt use a bow during the bow seaon thats your fault, buy a bow!!! You could always get a medical waiver for a crossbow and it was pretty easy to get!! Now that your 44 day season has been expanded to over 100 days give it a rest and quit whining about what did or didnt happen.
> 
> I hunt with longbows, recurves, compound, rifle and muzzleloader, I dont care if you are in the woods or not and if you didnt hunt because you were to lazy until you could use the crossbow you wont be where I hike into at 4am to get away from the crowds on the Public Land in KY


what needs to be given a rest is the pathetic "too lazy" crap


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> :chortle:
> 
> No doubt.... But that's alright. Kinda what I have to contend with being on the front lines fighting to protect even thesource's hunting and fishing rights in NYS.


Doctari - thanks for being on the front lines to protect Western NY's hunting and fishing rights, and that is absolute sincerity.

Make sure, however, that you are protecting "our" rights, and not your own. That is also in absolute sincerity.



doctariAFC said:


> Since he hasn't been here to "Try Again" with what the 1999 Future of NY Hunting Survey was really all about....


Actually, I WAS here, and I told you to stop playing games and get on with your point. I see you heeded my request.




doctariAFC said:


> THe real reason behind all this was to establish a database of sportsmen for two purposes, as follows:
> 
> 1 - Stronger Child Support payment enforcement
> 2 - Database of hunters/ gun owners


Hmmmmmmm.

First you said this:



doctariAFC said:


> In terms of the 1999 survey, one of the primary purposes was to gauge whether hunters (archery hunters in specific) would be amicable to expansion of the extended black powder season.


Then you said this:


doctariAFC said:


> The 1999 survey (let's keep it consistent, as the 1996 survey was a complete disaster) was truly geared to accomplish one major change, DECALS.


Now, you finish with this:



doctariAFC said:


> THe real reason behind all this was to establish a database of sportsmen for two purposes, as follows:
> 
> 1 - Stronger Child Support payment enforcement
> 2 - Database of hunters/ gun owners



As such a HUGE proponent of facts (and inlight that you are desperately in need of some to rebuke those I have actually shown), I suppose you have some PROOF of these allegations?

Well?


----------



## doctariAFC

Free Range said:


> Good information, Doc, but how is that connected with any of this? We are all glad to have someone “on the inside” but you can’t present “insider” information as facts. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but the only facts, as outlined by you and Ace, that matter are provable, documented, and repeatable data. Now where was this headed anyway, talking about surveys, and how one is reliable and the other isn’t. Oh yeah I remember now, so how does any of this affect the claim that one survey done by Cornell is Gospel, and the other is slanted, twisted and has no bearing?


This actually, in relation to the 1999 survey (not 1996, which again was considered a complete disaster) is again not any kind of indictment of Cornell. Cornell executed their part of the equation and provided accurate information concerning the results of the survey. However, to get to the meat of the issues with any survey, be it a "Future of Hunting" Survey, or a Crossbow attitude survey, or a QDM survey, one must examine deeper the reasons behind the survey, and how the consumer (a DEC or DNR) will use the information as it pertains to their ultimate agenda, which is never truly publicized to the hunting community at large.

Case in point, the NYS 1999 Future of hunting survey. NYS could have executed the stated goals of the survey without launching DECALS and 1-800-GAME-RPT. But the ultimate goal was exactly what I expressed. 

In terms of KY, I believe the goal of their survey, again handled by Cornell, was to flesh out hunter attitude towards crossbows. The survey did indeed contain some very compelling and factual data, not slanted as Cornell is not in the slanting business. What the agendas are behind the scenes in the State Houses of KY is another matter altogether, and this is where efforts should be focused, not on Cornell or their integrity. That one is an exercise in futility and poor justification for an objection to the information. And meanwhile, we avergae hunters sit here bickering and bloviating, furthering the division in our own ranks. Seems like a pretty petty and unproductive exercise to me.


----------



## Free Range

I don’t know if I ever called Cornell’s credibility into question or not. But I and many others have questioned the results. That is not an indictment on Cornell, just the study, and we “now” know, no thanks to Ace, that KY game dept wrote the questions. 



> will use the information as it pertains to their ultimate agenda, which is never truly publicized to the hunting community at large.


I agree 100%, and that is what is at question here, what did the DNR want to learn from the survey (KY)? It’s not hard to extrapolate that they could see $$ signs and “want” the survey to lean their way. Do I have “facts” to back that up, nope, but it’s not that much of a stretch, now is it. 



> What the agendas are behind the scenes in the State Houses of KY is another matter altogether, and this is where efforts should be focused, not on Cornell or their integrity.


Yes, and mostly Cornell’s integrity was not questioned, and Ace, being the all knowing person he is either held back the information about KY drafting the questions, or is not as “in the know” as he leads us to believe. The wording of the questions is what has always been at question, and if Cornell didn’t word them then their reputation was never at stake. 



> And meanwhile, we avergae hunters sit here bickering and bloviating, furthering the division in our own ranks. Seems like a pretty petty and unproductive exercise to me.


That “information” as you put it, will, or could have a major impact on bow hunting across the country, it at least should be honest, and complete. Wouldn’t you think? 

That brings me back to something, how does this justify the stance that the NYS survey, which clearly and overwhelmingly said “heck no, we won’t x-bow” become slanted and worthless, and the KY survey is Gospel and anyone that questions it is,,,well you take your pick of all the names we have been called.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Doctari - thanks for being on the front lines to protect Western NY's hunting and fishing rights, and that is absolute sincerity.
> 
> Make sure, however, that you are protecting "our" rights, and not your own. That is also in absolute sincerity.
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, I WAS here, and I told you to stop playing games and get on with your point. I see you heeded my request.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmmmmm.
> 
> First you said this:
> 
> 
> 
> Then you said this:
> 
> 
> Now, you finish with this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As such a HUGE proponent of facts (and inlight that you are desperately in need of some to rebuke those I have actually shown), I suppose you have some PROOF of these allegations?
> 
> Well?


Ask youself a couple questions..... 

Could the stated goals of the 1999 Survey been accomplished without the launch of DECALS?

Then, examine the timing of the Child Support enforcement laws and going after the Sporting License information as a tool to use to enforce these laws...

THen, question why the AG and the NYS Assembly moved to have this new and powerful "public record" database available for their searching and poking around at basically their leisure?

Is there "documented proof" of this? No. But, Federations have representatives working to lobby Albany as representatives of such groups as NYSCC and NYSRPA and SCOPE and NY Bowhunters, et al. And these folks get to the dirt of many matters, and these matters are discussed at length during Federation and Council meetings. Sometimes to the point where the meetings extend for many hours, and heads start thumping and tempers get short, etc. Being the Recording Secretary I have the unique priveledge of taking and compiling the minutes (18-22 pages worth per meeting). HARSH.

And, in all sincerity, my involvement with the fight for all our rights truly puts my own personal agendas last. I can certainly, as an independent voice clamour for stuff through editorials and such, but, when it comes to conducting the business at hand, it is the benefit of all that comes first, not the benefit of a few. 

If I didn't have enough to do, some in the Federation want to basically eliminate the Recording Sec and the Correspondence Sec positions and roll them up into a Secretary position. Will Elliott, our Corresponding Secretary for Erie County resigned his officer's post last month because he moved to Batavia, Genessee County, Region 8, and he did not believe it ethical to hold the officer position in the Erie County Federation if he did not live in Erie County, let alone Region 9. The directors are now campaigning to roll the jobs into one, and bless me with not only the minutes, but the letter writing as well  Its a lot of work, a lot of time, all volunteer. But I sincerely believe in the value of the work and the necessity of the work, and considering how the hunting community is aging, and that I am not yet 40, something compels me to do it. ALthough my official capacity is a representative of the Erie County sportsmen, I am quick to take the fight anywhere the help is needed. Not for me, but for the future.

To be honest, my biggest wish would be for more hunters to get involved. Attend the Federation meetings, join local Conservation Clubs, and get the first hand "inside" information. This is why I am a pretty big skeptic of what the NYS DEC states, and the activities of the NYS Assembly and Senate engage in concerning hunting and fishing legislation, gun control nonsesne, and the like. Even Agricultural Laws (the avenue the moonbats tried to use to stop hunting on all properties with fences on it) have an affect, creatively. The more hunters and anglers we can get involved and get informed, believe me, the better we will be able to protect our rights and heritage. 

This is why I extend the invitation to ANY hunter or angler to attend Federation Meetings. Heck, since WeLoveOutdoors.com is a member of the ECFSC, if you have registered with our site for free, you can attend any meeting as a club member, rather than a guest. Ya know?

Incidentally, just to make this crystal clear to all, my statements on this site and in any articles do not necessarily represent the Erie County Federation positions. I wanted to be certain that disclaimer was set forth as well


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> I don’t know if I ever called Cornell’s credibility into question or not. But I and many others have questioned the results. That is not an indictment on Cornell, just the study, and we “now” know, no thanks to Ace, that KY game dept wrote the questions.
> 
> So what? The people who paid for the survey, and contracted IT .. drafted the questions, this was never a secret, and nothing out of the ordinary at all, again anyone who doubts it "cough up" $70,000+ and let someone else draft the questions for YOU (which may or may not answer the question(s) YOU need answered and ARE paying for), then come back and prove that YOU did that exactly....., otherwise there is NO point....
> 
> 
> 
> I agree 100%, and that is what is at question here, what did the DNR want to learn from the survey (KY)? It’s not hard to extrapolate that they could see $$ signs and “want” the survey to lean their way. Do I have “facts” to back that up, nope, but it’s not that much of a stretch, now is it.
> 
> As it clearly shows in the survey itself (not hidden AND asked for by the "other side" along with the RMEF, N W T F and some others, ) the whole and sole purpose was to find out how Ky hunters and landowners felt about expanding the crossbow season to run concurrent with archery season....which is what it did in fact do.....
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and mostly Cornell’s integrity was not questioned, and Ace, being the all knowing person he is either held back the information about KY drafting the questions, or is not as “in the know” as he leads us to believe. The wording of the questions is what has always been at question, and if Cornell didn’t word them then their reputation was never at stake.
> 
> More misinformation (as usual) I've always known that and mentioned it several times, it is not relevent at all...."the wording" of the questions is NOT in question, they're *not* "leading" , they ARE easy to understand, and "to the point" nice try, but your spin won't ever win, ANYONE can easily read them for themselves and once they do, they'll see the utter BS that "non-point " really is....I even posted the main question right here......and I didn't see anyone "prove" anything "funny" odd or "leading" .......
> 
> 
> 
> That “information” as you put it, will, or could have a major impact on bow hunting across the country, it at least should be honest, and complete. Wouldn’t you think?
> 
> Can YOU prove it wasn't, I didn't think so, again no point made
> 
> That brings me back to something, how does this justify the stance that the NYS survey, which clearly and overwhelmingly said “heck no, we won’t x-bow” become slanted and worthless, and the KY survey is Gospel and anyone that questions it is,,,well you take your pick of all the names we have been called.


Could be the "reasons" behind doing them?

IN KY it was done becasue "some" didn't want to "trust" the first survey done by the KDFWR(in 2002)....so they demanded another survey .........and they got an *independent* one done by Cornell, which shows the same thing as the one they didn't trust (though somewhat more in favor which isn't odd, since by then, 

A.) it had been expanded and withdrawn...

B.) more information was out there for them to use to decide the issue on for themselves rather than only from the bow clubs....

C.) many understood that hunters and small businesses were out major cash because of it being passed and withdrawn......couldn't see any reason for that and chose to support expansion.....


I'm done with all of this, probably for good, I've tried to show the facts of what really happened here in KY, no one has been able to prove any of the facts incorrect....nor the survey as anything but "legit" since it was..some still have "issues or questions" but that's just not enough to make a real or serious thought out conclusion on, the facts on any of that are in fact "lacking".....

I can see some are not trying to "learn" anything, only hope to cast doubt on the facts, rather than actually checking on them and learning from them, that's fine and their choice(s) to make, 

I hope some will actually learn from them however, maybe they will??


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Ask youself a couple questions.....
> 
> Could the stated goals of the 1999 Survey been accomplished without the launch of DECALS?
> 
> Then, examine the timing of the Child Support enforcement laws and going after the Sporting License information as a tool to use to enforce these laws...
> 
> THen, question why the AG and the NYS Assembly moved to have this new and powerful "public record" database available for their searching and poking around at basically their leisure?


I have as much use for far right wing whackos as I do for far left wing whackos....which is to say NONE. I am uncomfortable with conspiracy theorists on either fringe .... you do not represent the main stream.



doctariAFC said:


> Is there "documented proof" of this? No.


What happened to the need for "facts", Doc.

I have them, you do not. You want us to believe you - I don't.

You suddenly look like an ultra right, anti-government nut job.

Not good.




doctariAFC said:


> Incidentally, just to make this crystal clear to all, my statements on this site and in any articles do not necessarily represent the Erie County Federation positions. I wanted to be certain that disclaimer was set forth as well


I bet they don't. First bit of truth I've heard out of you all day.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> So what? The people who paid for the survey, and contracted IT .. drafted the questions, this was never a secret, and nothing out of the ordinary at all, again anyone who doubts it "cough up" $70,000+ and let someone else draft the questions for YOU (which may or may not answer the question(s) YOU need answered and ARE paying for), then come back and prove that YOU did that exactly....., otherwise there is NO point....


Actually, there IS a point. Here is what (and the reference) the researchers at Cornell stated:
*
subtle differences in how alternatives are presented to respondents can influence their opinions (Vining, 1987).*

Let me translate for you. That means the outcome of the question can depend on how the question was worded (or who worded the question.)

It would have been MUCH better (from an independence point of view) if Cornell had been allowed to word their own questions, or at least study how the question was worded, don't you think?


----------



## dalebow

JC
"Too Lazy" describes any abled bodied man that would carry a crossbow in bow season.....Lazyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!

You want to sit your fat [email protected] in a stand and shoot somehting with a scope and trigger that you are not even holding at full draw....I look at all the children that are shooting bow and killing game and think how sad you must be.....I think they should issue each hunter 2 deer tags, you might get a buck tag and a doe tag or just two doe tag, it would be random yet the weapon would be your choice, fill your tags and your done, we would see how many of you x-bow wanna-be hunters would choose their cross-gun over their rifle like many true compound/longbow/recurve/selfbow hunters would choose to do.

Lazyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy


----------



## Jim C

dalebow said:


> JC
> "Too Lazy" describes any abled bodied man that would carry a crossbow in bow season.....Lazyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!
> 
> You want to sit your fat [email protected] in a stand and shoot somehting with a scope and trigger that you are not even holding at full draw....I look at all the children that are shooting bow and killing game and think how sad you must be.....I think they should issue each hunter 2 deer tags, you might get a buck tag and a doe tag or just two doe tag, it would be random yet the weapon would be your choice, fill your tags and your done, we would see how many of you x-bow wanna-be hunters would choose their cross-gun over their rifle like many true compound/longbow/recurve/selfbow hunters would choose to do.
> 
> Lazyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy



this is the pathetic sort of mentality we are dealing with people. Calling it a crossgun shows we are dealing with a rather ignorant individual. Does your arrogance extend to compounds or do you realize saying that sort of crap to them would lose you points with your friends? The ultimate stupidity-thinking what sort of bow you use makes you more worthy than another guy


----------



## thesource

dalebow said:


> JCI look at all the children that are shooting bow and killing game and think how sad you must be.....



I here ya. "Look at me, look at me, I have a crossbow, it shoots an arrow, I'm a bowhunter, really I am, I demand you accept me"....all the while that women, children, and physically challenged are finding a way to kill deer with real bows,

Disgraceful, really....


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I here ya. "Look at me, look at me, I have a crossbow, it shoots an arrow, I'm a bowhunter, really I am, I demand you accept me"....all the while that women, children, and physically challenged are finding a way to kill deer with real bows,
> 
> Disgraceful, really....



the disgrace is people with self esteem and mental issues who feel a need to belittle others based on what sort of bow they use. I would like you and Dale to tell us exactly what you have done to promote archery and bowhunting rather than listening to this sort of arrogant BS from two people who probably have zero standing in the sport


----------



## JavaMan

I was just talking yesterday to a bowhunter who carries a compound who just added a crossbow. He is glad he has the choice.

anyone who looks down on how someone wants to participate in an individual recreational sport needs some serious dose of maturity.

JavaMan


----------



## spec

Java I fear you may have missed the point. Nobody here is against the crossbow(esp in KY), but want it to have its own season.


----------



## Jim C

spec said:


> Java I fear you may have missed the point. Nobody here is against the crossbow(esp in KY), but want it to have its own season.



really-tells us why a seperate season is needed? me I would rather have several months and share with other archers. I also thing the arrogant smarminess of a few on this board towards crossbows is wide spread among the less educated and that is clear hostility spec


----------



## Free Range

> By Ace
> I'm done with all of this, probably for good, I've tried to show the facts of what really happened here in KY, no one has been able to prove any of the facts incorrect....


Nice wording, and I agree you did try, but because you are wrong all you can do is try. 



> By spec
> Java I fear you may have missed the point. Nobody here is against the crossbow(esp in KY), but want it to have its own season.


They all mis the point, and no matter how loud they scream I’m a bowhunter, actions speak louder then words. Anyone that is for xb’s for able bodied persons during bow season, is not a bow hunter, no matter how hard they try to convince themselves and others. 
Bowhunters, care about tradition, bowhunters work harder and enjoy the fact it takes that hard work, bowhunters know the difference between bowhunting and killing with an arrow.


----------



## Free Range

> By Ace
> Could be the "reasons" behind doing them?


From what’s been said the reason is the same, to see if xb’s should be allowed. Or did you mean to say “could be because you got the results you wanted” from the KY study? 



> By Ace
> IN KY it was done becasue "some" didn't want to "trust" the first survey done by the KDFWR(in 2002)....so they demanded another survey .........


And the mistake was they didn’t demand to over see the wording of the questions. Two surveys worded wrong doesn’t make the second one better just because Cornell administered it. 



> By Ace
> it had been expanded and withdrawn...


And what was the reason given, Ace, this should be an easy one for ya. 



> By Ace
> I'm done with all of this, probably for good,


That would be a relief for us all, LOL


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Nice wording, and I agree you did try, but because you are wrong all you can do is try.
> 
> 
> 
> They all mis the point, and no matter how loud they scream I’m a bowhunter, actions speak louder then words. Anyone that is for xb’s for able bodied persons during bow season, is not a bow hunter, no matter how hard they try to convince themselves and others.
> Bowhunters, care about tradition, bowhunters work harder and enjoy the fact it takes that hard work, bowhunters know the difference between bowhunting and killing with an arrow.


more moronic nonsense. you can sit there and pretend you are a bowhunter and pretend people with crossbows are not but we all know its just the ranting of someone who has self esteem issues and wants to feel he is better than someone else

You can also call yourself a professional bowhunter to try to cause people to believe you are better than people who are not so arrogant but the rest of us just laugh at you


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> I have as much use for far right wing whackos as I do for far left wing whackos....which is to say NONE. I am uncomfortable with conspiracy theorists on either fringe .... you do not represent the main stream.
> 
> 
> 
> What happened to the need for "facts", Doc.
> 
> I have them, you do not. You want us to believe you - I don't.
> 
> You suddenly look like an ultra right, anti-government nut job.
> 
> Not good.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I bet they don't. First bit of truth I've heard out of you all day.


Source.... How about you try something new. I know this is going to be very, very difficult. But why don't you GET YOURSELF EDUCATED TO THE REALITIES OF ALL OF HUNTING AND ANGLING IN NYS? YOu are so woefully inept and undereductaed, yet continually spout forth so much nonsense it is tiring and unproductive. You have delivered ZERO value in just about every debate in every thread on this site. And your obvious lack of initiative to get involved beyond the nonsense of your anti-crossbow stance is evidence thereof.

When it comes to debating the merits of crossbows, use facts to back up your claims that it will "destroy bowhunting". You have yet to produce one single shred of compelling evidence to support this absolute mentally bankrupt nonsense you continue to spout. ZERO. Your emotional passions don't cut it, sorry to be so frank, but the truth hurts.

When it comes to what motivates legislatures, Source, we are now talking about politics and political agendas. This is an entirely different realm, completely unrelated to the nonsense you spout. You obviously demonstrate complete ignorance to the political landscape and how it impacts all our rights as hunters and anglers, and these political conditions affect all of hunting. In other words, what affects regular season, black powder or archery, affects the whole of hunting.

You are a complete waste of time. Get involved and get an education or get out of the way, cease your unproductive ankle-biting and pray guys like me continue to fight to be sure you can hunt and fish in NYS for many years to come. We have enough completely ignorant non-hunters in NYS, we do not need to ADD completely ignorant HUNTERS to the mix as well.


----------



## JavaMan

spec said:


> Java I fear you may have missed the point. Nobody here is against the crossbow(esp in KY), but want it to have its own season.


Mr Spec

it has it's season=archery season. Archery equipment all belongs in its own season.

but let's play with that idea. Where would this season come from? And why should not stickbows and compounds not have seperate seasons?

what exactly is the benefit to having these seperate seasons from a game managemnt point of view?

JavaMan


----------



## JavaMan

> They all mis the point, and no matter how loud they scream I’m a bowhunter, actions speak louder then words. Anyone that is for xb’s for able bodied persons during bow season, is not a bow hunter, no matter how hard they try to convince themselves and others.
> Bowhunters, care about tradition, bowhunters work harder and enjoy the fact it takes that hard work, bowhunters know the difference between bowhunting and killing with an arrow.


Bowhunting has evolved from the days of Saxton Pope and Art Young. That tradition included making one's own equipment from scratch. Now people can go out and buy ready made bows and the like. No longer do you have to sharpen your own broadheads-that was a tradition of old. You can hunt from a tree or sit in a blind that your movement cannot be detected.

the facts are most bowhunters do not care about the traditions of old-they just go out and hunt. They could care less about any organization that has the audacity to call itself Professional Bowhntrs

JavaMan


----------



## doctariAFC

Free Range said:


> I don’t know if I ever called Cornell’s credibility into question or not. But I and many others have questioned the results. That is not an indictment on Cornell, just the study, and we “now” know, no thanks to Ace, that KY game dept wrote the questions.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree 100%, and that is what is at question here, what did the DNR want to learn from the survey (KY)? It’s not hard to extrapolate that they could see $$ signs and “want” the survey to lean their way. Do I have “facts” to back that up, nope, but it’s not that much of a stretch, now is it.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, and mostly Cornell’s integrity was not questioned, and Ace, being the all knowing person he is either held back the information about KY drafting the questions, or is not as “in the know” as he leads us to believe. The wording of the questions is what has always been at question, and if Cornell didn’t word them then their reputation was never at stake.
> 
> 
> 
> That “information” as you put it, will, or could have a major impact on bow hunting across the country, it at least should be honest, and complete. Wouldn’t you think?
> 
> That brings me back to something, how does this justify the stance that the NYS survey, which clearly and overwhelmingly said “heck no, we won’t x-bow” become slanted and worthless, and the KY survey is Gospel and anyone that questions it is,,,well you take your pick of all the names we have been called.


Again, some of this, as you have touched on, goes into the politics of the entire thing. In NYS, the 1996 crossbow "study" was aimed at hunters also holding archery stamps, and, in and of itself, this seemed logical, as it was pitched that only archery hunters should have the input. I can understand the logic of that, but, hunting is hunting and the whole of hunting should be gauged, not simply bowhunters. This approach gets to a more accurate hunter attitude and moves the debate forward. The 1996 survey, based on the methodology, was geared to attempt to stop debate, shutting out the majority of hunters in NYS from even getting their attitude considered. This causes division in our ranks, IMHO, and indeed went a good ways to hurt NY Bowhunters and their reputation of being a solid pro-hunter, pro-bowhunting organization. Anytime any organization that represents sportsmen, either in total or in part, conducts actions which are perceived as stifling debate to serve their own agenda causes fallout and causes loss of credibility and even support. Since that fiasco, NYB membership has declined, and judging from recent correspondence on the subject, this trend is continuing. This weakens NYB, and we do not need to weaken any of our hunting allies, even if this weakening is self-inflicted.

The poll we conducted on crossbows last summer provided a better picture, but wasn't scientific by any stretch. The countless letters received by Federations and Outdoors publications bear out that a good number of hunters desire the crossbow as an option for varying reasons. It would be a decent idea to gauge the hunter attitudes on this issue again, using a larger sample and all hunters as the pool, not just hunters holding bowhunting stamps. We need to move the debate forward, not stifle debate on the subject...


----------



## JavaMan

doctariAFC said:


> Source.... How about you try something new. I know this is going to be very, very difficult. But why don't you GET YOURSELF EDUCATED TO THE REALITIES OF ALL OF HUNTING AND ANGLING IN NYS? YOu are so woefully inept and undereductaed, yet continually spout forth so much nonsense it is tiring and unproductive. You have delivered ZERO value in just about every debate in every thread on this site. And your obvious lack of initiative to get involved beyond the nonsense of your anti-crossbow stance is evidence thereof.
> 
> When it comes to debating the merits of crossbows, use facts to back up your claims that it will "destroy bowhunting". You have yet to produce one single shred of compelling evidence to support this absolute mentally bankrupt nonsense you continue to spout. ZERO. Your emotional passions don't cut it, sorry to be so frank, but the truth hurts.
> 
> When it comes to what motivates legislatures, Source, we are now talking about politics and political agendas. This is an entirely different realm, completely unrelated to the nonsense you spout. You obviously demonstrate complete ignorance to the political landscape and how it impacts all our rights as hunters and anglers, and these political conditions affect all of hunting. In other words, what affects regular season, black powder or archery, affects the whole of hunting.
> 
> You are a complete waste of time. Get involved and get an education or get out of the way, cease your unproductive ankle-biting and pray guys like me continue to fight to be sure you can hunt and fish in NYS for many years to come. We have enough completely ignorant non-hunters in NYS, we do not need to ADD completely ignorant HUNTERS to the mix as well.


well said! Mr Source's posts are infantile.

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

JavaMan said:


> Bowhunting has evolved from the days of Saxton Pope and Art Young. That tradition included making one's own equipment from scratch. Now people can go out and buy ready made bows and the like. No longer do you have to sharpen your own broadheads-that was a tradition of old. You can hunt from a tree or sit in a blind that your movement cannot be detected.
> 
> the facts are most bowhunters do not care about the traditions of old-they just go out and hunt. They could care less about any organization that has the audacity to call itself Professional Bowhntrs
> 
> JavaMan


right you are. 99% of the bowhunters could be called "lazy" by someone else.
the pathetic ones are the ones who want to prevent those they think are slightly "lazier" than they from hunting in "their season


----------



## aceoky

aceoky said:


> ...
> 
> *Would you support or oppose expanding crossbow season from its current time frame to a time frame that runs at the same time with archery season for deer?
> 
> Would you say you: <1> Strongly oppose expanding crossbow season <2> Somewhat oppose expanding crossbow season <3> Neither support nor oppose expanding crossbow season <4> Somewhat support expanding crossbow season <5> Strongly support expanding crossbow season [green]<d> Do not know <r> Refused @ *
> 
> THAT (from the survey) is NOT anywhere even close to what YOU are alledging........ANYONE can see that is "direct" and "to the point" of what was needed to be known........just more unfounded BS because there is NO real problem as anyone reading the above can easily see.....
> 
> *FR said "And the mistake was they didn’t demand to over see the wording of the questions. Two surveys worded wrong doesn’t make the second one better just because Cornell administered it."*
> 
> 
> EVERY question asked was in the exact same format, WHO exactly do you know who A) can't understand what's being asked B) COULD be "led" by these questions???
> 
> NOW please show us ALL what is "wrong" with the wording? .......either most were in support or not, clearly they WERE for the expansion (yes even the "bowhunters" by a majority)
> 
> Once again, more "spin" unfounded claims and accusations based upon rhetoric(if even that)........NO basis in facts though at all


Glad you FR are so releived, that I'm pretty much done with this, (yet YOU keep "calling me out", which proves many things among which, what you say doesn't hold much wieght, IF you were so glad you'd stop with the BS and misinformation, as well as keeping on with my name doing so)

*Dalebow*, I have never even shot a crossbow,(watched several being shot by NEW archery hunters mostly women btw, at an archery shop/range in Corbin Ky after the "first go around".........I also paid attention to what THEY said about NOW being able to do something(archery hunt during archery season) for years but couldn't before the expansion occured.......

I DO bowhunt, and love it, the difference IS I want to share that with others, YOU (and some more) do NOT want to share it unless it's done "your way", which in *reality* IS just another way of exclusion of those who can't do so for many various reasons)While YOU talk about those women, kids and seniors who DO manage to hunt and even kill deer YOU have NO regard for those who can't, I do however wish for them to enjoy the whole thing, just as I do, and the choice of weapon is least important in the whole experience, most know this is a fact.......as archery hunter numbers continue to drop too quickly, when something is found that might slow or even stop that trend (or even reverse it), some make lame excuses for NOT giving it a fair chance......IF you want to "shoot yourself in the foot" go right ahead, just don't shoot the rest of us while doing so.

Most can see the truth, and KNOW that there is simply NO good reason to not allow an archery weapon during an open archery season, and to this point not one good reason or any facts have been presented to change any of that....just "me" "mine" "special" etc. not realizing the 99% let-off compound now available (which ARE legal) only add to the fact of what it's "really all about" exclusion not inclusion of other archery hunters......

I'm for more, archery opportunity and archery hunters; while it at least appears YOU (and others) would be "fine" with the fast dropping archery hunter numbers, which in fact is good for no one.....more archery hunters (even using a crossbow) adds to the "numbers game" politicians love to "play" AND also adds to our collective "political clout" .......NO way to honestly dispute that......HSUS and those merging with them have many millions of $$$ available and have VOWED to end ALL *bowhunting* Nationwide yes WE are their number one priortity and target..........seems that's good enough reason to "stand united" and NOT fight fellow hunters who in reality ONLY want to enjoy the archery season with another archery weapon.......

I'd say all that's been said about what actually has taken place in the great Ky "mess" has been, at least a couple of times, thus there is no real reason for my repeating it, "calling me out" won't work very well either fwiw, however this total BS and misinformation, and based upon such foolish "ideas" does need to be addressed, so I felt the need to address these, see the main question posted (again) above, for ALL to see....

Some would LOVE for others to believe that since the KDFWR worded the questions (which THEY *paid for*, and to insure exactly what was required, WAS addressed...... remember the "other side" played a *key role * in having another survey done, NO good reason to "take chances" it wasnt' done as they requested (or was it demanded?)....however anyone can read the questions and see and realize it's total BS to claim anything "funny" or "odd" by how things were worded........and those who've read the survey can easily see to find out what was wanted on the expansion (not what color car people preferred) there was NO way any more clear or precise than what WAS in fact done,the answers ARE the problem for them.........they don't like 'em......


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Actually, there IS a point. Here is what (and the reference) the researchers at Cornell stated:
> *
> subtle differences in how alternatives are presented to respondents can influence their opinions (Vining, 1987).*
> 
> Good research (and referrece), but has NO part or parcel in this.........show the "subtle differences" , you can't they are not there, as I will again prove
> 
> 
> 
> Let me translate for you. That means the outcome of the question can depend on how the question was worded (or who worded the question.)
> 
> Thanks anyway, but I understood it the first time...
> 
> It would have been MUCH better (from an independence point of view) if Cornell had been allowed to word their own questions, or at least study how the question was worded, don't you think?


Absurd and not relevent.........the questions are NOT "leading" nor anything else, NOR do they differ for the various response (other than the needed and obvious differences that is):

*Would you support or oppose expanding crossbow season from its current time frame to a time frame that runs at the same time with archery season for deer? *

*Would you say you: <1> Strongly oppose expanding crossbow season <2> Somewhat oppose expanding crossbow season <3> Neither support nor oppose expanding crossbow season <4> Somewhat support expanding crossbow season <5> Strongly support expanding crossbow season [green]<d> Do not know <r> Refused @ *

NOTE : there is NO "change" nor "subtle differences " at all there, it's simply either or...........no more no less......as I stated NO point made....


----------



## Free Range

> YOU talk about those women, kids and seniors who DO manage to hunt and even kill deer YOU have NO regard for those who can't, I do however wish for them to enjoy the whole thing, just as I do, and the choice of weapon is least important in the whole experience, most know this is a fact.......


One could assume by this statement that you would favor “internet hunting” and or guns during bow season. Or are you for excluding those that can’t get out in the woods to hunt?


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Source.... How about you try something new. I know this is going to be very, very difficult. But why don't you GET YOURSELF EDUCATED TO THE REALITIES OF ALL OF HUNTING AND ANGLING IN NYS? YOu are so woefully inept and undereductaed, yet continually spout forth so much nonsense it is tiring and unproductive. You have delivered ZERO value in just about every debate in every thread on this site. And your obvious lack of initiative to get involved beyond the nonsense of your anti-crossbow stance is evidence thereof.


Uh, uh. Temper, temper. Just because you have been SPANKED by facts from the Cornell report is no reason to lose your cool and resort to personal attacks (which is against the rules of this forum, by the way. I should report you.)

What you consider reality, I consider conspiracy. I do not share your ultra right wing anti-government agenda. That does not mean I am uninvolved with protecting hunting, particularly bowhunting, on many levels. 



doctariAFC said:


> When it comes to debating the merits of crossbows, use facts to back up your claims that it will "destroy bowhunting". You have yet to produce one single shred of compelling evidence to support this absolute mentally bankrupt nonsense you continue to spout. ZERO. Your emotional passions don't cut it, sorry to be so frank, but the truth hurts.


Don't apologize, its a sign of weakness. But please try to tell something close to the truth. Facts have been presented, and what you need to understand is that my facts do not need your blessing to be compelling.

Just because you refuse to acknowledge crossbow opposition facts does not make them less truthful. In the end, you are NOT the jury. You are an insignificant speck of dust whose opinion matters no more or no less than the next man's. A little humility would go a long way.



doctariAFC said:


> When it comes to what motivates legislatures, Source, we are now talking about politics and political agendas. This is an entirely different realm, completely unrelated to the nonsense you spout. You obviously demonstrate complete ignorance to the political landscape and how it impacts all our rights as hunters and anglers, and these political conditions affect all of hunting. In other words, what affects regular season, black powder or archery, affects the whole of hunting.


You paint with too broad a brush. I understand that we need to protect hunting ..... I am unwilling to sacrifice bowhunting to do so. That doesn't make me ignorant or wrong, it just means my priorities are different then yours. I would be willing to stand with you on almost all hunting issues - until you start calling me ignorant, myopic, inept, undereducated, etc....

Then I start saying to he!! with you and whatever agenda you may have.



doctariAFC said:


> You are a complete waste of time. Get involved and get an education or get out of the way, cease your unproductive ankle-biting and pray guys like me continue to fight to be sure you can hunt and fish in NYS for many years to come. We have enough completely ignorant non-hunters in NYS, we do not need to ADD completely ignorant HUNTERS to the mix as well.


You know what, Doctari? I do not want guys like you leading the fight, I want traditional, regular, conservative sportsmen.

I want people who are interested in protecting NYS hunting and fishing heritage, not someone who is looking to make a buck out it as an "Outdoor Marketing Analyst".

I do not want the vast majority of NY'ers, who do not hunt but do not oppose hunting, to think hunters are all radical, unreasonable, self-effacing, loudmouthed arrogant buffoons simply because one writer from Buffalo portrays us all as such.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> One could assume by this statement that you would favor “internet hunting” and or guns during bow season. Or are you for excluding those that can’t get out in the woods to hunt?


One could "assume" many things, that doesn't make them true, just as your "assumptions" on the wording of the survey were NOT close to true...(among many other things you have so far "assumed" incorrectly to this point)......

HUGE difference in fighting for an archery weapon during an open archery season and ANYTHING you have so far "thrown out there" in the "hopes" than someone might actually belive the misinformation......assumptions notwithstanding........ 

Continue to Assume, anything you can, most know how foolish your claims are and have been thus far.....:cocktail:


----------



## spec

Java- they had a crossbow season- it began in November. In my opinion a crossbow is not archey equipment- but I freely admit- my opinion. Also it is NOT a deer management issue. Any management questions might be better answered by the KDFWR.

Hey ace- I thought you said you were done with this. This isn't Godfather 2 or the Sopranos- "I get out and they PULL me back in"!!!


----------



## aceoky

spec said:


> Java- they had a crossbow season- it began in November.
> 
> A "whopping" 10 whole days no less, while OTHER ARCHERY weapons get from Sept - Jan......
> 
> In my opinion a crossbow is not archey equipment- but I freely admit- my opinion. Also it is NOT a deer management issue. Any management questions might be better answered by the *KDFWR.*
> 
> Who see it now as always as a "win-win" for Ky (full expansion)
> 
> Hey ace- I thought you said you were done with this. This isn't Godfather 2 or the Sopranos- "I get out and they PULL me back in"!!!


Well,

I'm NOT going to let pure falsehoods be portrayed nor any bs about what I'm "For" or against go unanswered.........that would be very foolish..... There are many other false claims, I've "let go", because they're not worth the time, or effort.......

Some however do need to be answered in spite of my attmepts to "mend fences" as much as is possible......period


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Uh, uh. Temper, temper. Just because you have been SPANKED by facts from the Cornell report is no reason to lose your cool and resort to personal attacks (which is against the rules of this forum, by the way. I should report you.)
> 
> What you consider reality, I consider conspiracy. I do not share your ultra right wing anti-government agenda. That does not mean I am uninvolved with protecting hunting, particularly bowhunting, on many levels.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't apologize, its a sign of weakness. But please try to tell something close to the truth. Facts have been presented, and what you need to understand is that my facts do not need your blessing to be compelling.
> 
> Just because you refuse to acknowledge crossbow opposition facts does not make them less truthful. In the end, you are NOT the jury. You are an insignificant speck of dust whose opinion matters no more or no less than the next man's. A little humility would go a long way.
> 
> 
> 
> You paint with too broad a brush. I understand that we need to protect hunting ..... I am unwilling to sacrifice bowhunting to do so. That doesn't make me ignorant or wrong, it just means my priorities are different then yours. I would be willing to stand with you on almost all hunting issues - until you start calling me ignorant, myopic, inept, undereducated, etc....
> 
> Then I start saying to he!! with you and whatever agenda you may have.
> 
> 
> 
> You know what, Doctari? I do not want guys like you leading the fight, I want traditional, regular, conservative sportsmen.
> 
> I want people who are interested in protecting NYS hunting and fishing heritage, not someone who is looking to make a buck out it as an "Outdoor Marketing Analyst".
> 
> I do not want the vast majority of NY'ers, who do not hunt but do not oppose hunting, to think hunters are all radical, unreasonable, self-effacing, loudmouthed arrogant buffoons simply because one writer from Buffalo portrays us all as such.


You do enough enough damage to us all Source. I am merely attempting now to clean it up. Thanks so very much for making the job that much harder, you're the best friend the anti's have. Get educated by getting involved. You clearly are not. Not by a long shot.

Well done.


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> It would be a decent idea to gauge the hunter attitudes on this issue again, using a larger sample and all hunters as the pool, not just hunters holding bowhunting stamps. We need to move the debate forward, not stifle debate on the subject...


More misrepresentation from Doctari.

As I have already PROVEN, the 1999 survey sampled across ALL license holders, and not just hunters holding bowstamps.

Only 27% wanted crossbows in Archery season. That means 3/4 do NOT. There is nothing to move forward except your own agenda, Doctari. Just because the mainstream runs counter to your position does not mean that somehow everyone else is wrong and you are miraculously right. Listen to the will of NY hunters and represent instead of bloviating continuously like a pompous you-know -what.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> More misrepresentation from Doctari.
> 
> As I have already PROVEN, the 1999 survey sampled across ALL license holders, and not just hunters holding bowstamps.
> 
> Only 27% wanted crossbows in Archery season. That means 3/4 do NOT. There is nothing to move forward except your own agenda, Doctari. Just because the mainstream runs counter to your position does not mean that somehow everyone else is wrong and you are miraculously right. Listen to the will of NY hunters and represent instead of bloviating continuously like a pompous you-know -what.


I am involved with the Erie County Federation, Source. I can speak to our official position on crossbows, as we have already taken one. We're for them. Thanks. I guess I am doing my job after all :confused3:

Incidentally, the Erie County Federation represents approximately 9,000 Sportsmen and women in Erie County. Seems like more folks than what participated in the survey, does it not?

Thanks for the "validation"


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> you're the best friend the anti's have.



 

Not even close.

Attacking my character won't salvage yours. It wasn't the Cornell report that made you look ridiculous and ruined your credibility, it was your steadfast refusal to admit you were wrong in the face of that report.

Cowboy up and get over it. Realize that their are others equally intelligent and equally motivated who will catch your misrepresentations and smash them back at you sooner or later.

Either be right, or be careful. But don't say stupid, vengeful crap just because you were bested.....


----------



## ballard

May I suggest that we all join arms for a great big group hug?????


:kiss:


----------



## doctariAFC

ballard said:


> May I suggest that we all join arms for a great big group hug?????
> 
> 
> :kiss:


:grouphug:


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> I am involved with the Erie County Federation, Source. I can speak to our official position on crossbows, as we have already taken one. We're for them. Thanks. I guess I am doing my job after all :confused3:
> 
> Incidentally, the Erie County Federation represents approximately 9,000 Sportsmen and women in Erie County. Seems like more folks than what participated in the survey, does it not?
> 
> Thanks for the "validation"



LOL - you are a hoot. 

You wanted us to believe your meaningless poll on your pet project website mattered when it was hundreds of voters.

You got your panties in a wad when anyone challenged Cornell's ability or integrity, yet now suggest they do not have the statistical understanding to create the right sample size for their state wide survey?


Whatever man. you are out there....:der:


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> LOL - you are a hoot.
> 
> You wanted us to believe your meaningless poll on your pet project website mattered when it was hundreds of voters.
> 
> You got your panties in a wad when anyone challenged Cornell's ability or integrity, yet now suggest they do not have the statistical understanding to create the right sample size for their state wide survey?
> 
> 
> Whatever man. you are out there....:der:




you dodged a fact, Source. Artfully at that. I give you high marks, there's political hope for you yet.

The FACT that you missed (or chose to ignore) is @ 9,000 sportsmen and women support crossbow legalization throughout hunting seasons. Lest you forget where my personal stance is on crossbows in NYS (a compromise providing 1-2 weeks in back end of early archery). But the body I am an officer in supports full early archery season inclusion of crossbow... Hmmmm...

So, I guess I may be a bit more valuable than you think, eh?


----------



## thesource

Nope.

I have no use for anyone who continuously boasts about how well connected they are, constantly name drops, imagines their role in the big picture as much larger than it actually is.

Life's experience has proven to me that such folks are out for themselves first and their cause second. 

Not interested in anything you are selling.

But thanks.

Please post up the official documentation that shows 
A) There are 9000 members of the Erie County Federation
B) That EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM (that would be 9000) SUPPORT CROSSBOWS DURING NY BOWSEASON.

Anxiously awaiting evidence of your "facts" - please post for all to see.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Nope.
> 
> I have no use for anyone who continuously boasts about how well connected they are, constantly name drops, imagines their role in the big picture as much larger than it actually is.
> 
> Life's experience has proven to me that such folks are out for themselves first and their cause second.
> 
> Not interested in anything you are selling.
> 
> But thanks.
> 
> Please post up the official documentation that shows
> A) There are 9000 members of the Erie County Federation
> B) That EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM (that would be 9000) SUPPORT CROSSBOWS DURING NY BOWSEASON.
> 
> Anxiously awaiting evidence of your "facts" - please post for all to see.


visit their website. www.eriectyfsc.org ... Hopefully their webmaster has updated the site. Their position on crossbows was taken well before I became an officer. I know the last few months minutes have not been due to the webmaster's computer taking a dump....

But here, for your reading please. Looks like the New York State Conservation Council also supports Crossbow Legislation as well....

http://www.eriectyfsc.org/articles/NY CROSSBOW LAW IN WORKS.htm

And they represent how many sportsmen? Oh and CANY, I believe they, too, suuport the crossbow legalization. They got 60,000 members. 

Ooops. I guess that could be a great reason why the surveys you are clinging to are called into some serious question. Its also why I provided the inside information so all would get a better understanding of the behind the scenes stuff. But, as usual, your tunnel vision is just too narrow to make out the forests for the trees....

In addition.... For your reading pleasure

http://www.eriectyfsc.org/articles/Willsawardwinningcolumn.htm

Now that's a BIG OUCH for ya. Again, get educated, please. Operating from a position of ignorance is just not helpful, and shines a real poor light on you personally.


----------



## JavaMan

doctariAFC said:


> visit their website. www.eriectyfsc.org ... Hopefully their webmaster has updated the site. Their position on crossbows was taken well before I became an officer. I know the last few months minutes have not been due to the webmaster's computer taking a dump....
> 
> But here, for your reading please. Looks like the New York State Conservation Council also supports Crossbow Legislation as well....
> 
> http://www.eriectyfsc.org/articles/NY CROSSBOW LAW IN WORKS.htm
> 
> And they represent how many sportsmen? Oh and CANY, I believe they, too, suuport the crossbow legalization. They got 60,000 members.
> 
> Ooops. I guess that could be a great reason why the surveys you are clinging to are called into some serious question. Its also why I provided the inside information so all would get a better understanding of the behind the scenes stuff. But, as usual, your tunnel vision is just too narrow to make out the forests for the trees....


looks like Mr Source got slapped again. His posts are so infantile and simple I doubt if he actually produced a credible post it would be noticed.

How long is it going to be before crossbows are a legal bowhunting element in NYS?

JavaMan


----------



## doctariAFC

JavaMan said:


> looks like Mr Source got slapped again. His posts are so infantile and simple I doubt if he actually produced a credible post it would be noticed.
> 
> How long is it going to be before crossbows are a legal bowhunting element in NYS?
> 
> JavaMan


Well, this year we did not work on any legisative initiatives, as we wanted to focus on the lowering of the hunting ages (which got delayed in the Assembly until the next session), continuing CWD and many fishing regulations have also been pretty active. The issues are fast & furious, plus fighting the anti-gunwackos has been a full time job in itself with 11 initiatives launched by the moonbats in the Assembly. Add QDM into this, and we have had our hands full, to say the least.

However, our Big Game Committee Chairman put forth a motion that our Federation should set forth our allotted two resolutions per year to the NYSCC, making this mandatory. Vote carried unanimously. This year the Erie County Federation set forth zero resolutions, until the Emergency Resolution I crafted on the position against the WHA. The big resolution Paul Stoos specifically mentioned is crossbow legislation. We will be submitting that again next year, and, with a little luck, and a lot of hard work, we'll get it.

Oh, and just in case you didn;t read this one, because I added it after you quoted the post... I'll post it again

http://www.eriectyfsc.org/articles/Willsawardwinningcolumn.htm


----------



## JavaMan

thanks

I understand PA has increased crossbow use and I know Ontario has had crossbows in their archery seasons for over 3 decades. Are those examples used to give additional credence to allow NYS sportsman another option?

I've heard the age of NYS bowhunters is 40+ and with the increased demands of family and career it can be a juggle as well.

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> visit their website. www.eriectyfsc.org ... Hopefully their webmaster has updated the site. Their position on crossbows was taken well before I became an officer. I know the last few months minutes have not been due to the webmaster's computer taking a dump....
> 
> But here, for your reading please. Looks like the New York State Conservation Council also supports Crossbow Legislation as well....
> 
> http://www.eriectyfsc.org/articles/NY CROSSBOW LAW IN WORKS.htm
> 
> And they represent how many sportsmen? Oh and CANY, I believe they, too, suuport the crossbow legalization. They got 60,000 members.
> 
> Ooops. I guess that could be a great reason why the surveys you are clinging to are called into some serious question. Its also why I provided the inside information so all would get a better understanding of the behind the scenes stuff. But, as usual, your tunnel vision is just too narrow to make out the forests for the trees....
> 
> In addition.... For your reading pleasure
> 
> http://www.eriectyfsc.org/articles/Willsawardwinningcolumn.htm
> 
> Now that's a BIG OUCH for ya. Again, get educated, please. Operating from a position of ignorance is just not helpful, and shines a real poor light on you personally.




LOL

Yea ouch.

First - you didn't show any evidence that Erie County Fed even SUPPORTS the crossbow, let alone that ALL 9000 people represented do. 

Second - Nice link to the NYSCC's supposed support of crossbowa. Its dated 2003. Notice their reasons - _legalized use of crossbows would help increase the number of hunters as well as generate much-needed revenue for the Conservation Fund_ - don't even mention the word bow or bowhunting?

Notice that its all about money?

Yuck.

You have showed nothing - NOTHING - that shows public support for crossbows in NY.

You haven't showed any data at all, actually.

A big ouch? More like a big snooze. You have been slapped around for 2 days with a Cornell study that you now say say is irrelevant, after you first claimed that Cornell is above reproach..

A joke. That's what you must be trying to pull. Cause you sure aren't proving anything.


----------



## JavaMan

I read that link and it answered a number of my questions. My view is the NYB are much like a PETA organization. What is their total membership vs how many bowhunters in NYS?

JavaMan


----------



## JavaMan

thesource said:


> LOL
> 
> Yea ouch.
> 
> First - you didn't show any evidence that Erie County Fed even SUPPORTS the crossbow, let alone that ALL 9000 people represented do.
> 
> Second - Nice link to the NYSCC's supposed support of crossbowa. Its dated 2003. Notice their reasons - _legalized use of crossbows would help increase the number of hunters as well as generate much-needed revenue for the Conservation Fund_ - don't even mention the word bow or bowhunting?
> 
> Notice that its all about money?
> 
> Yuck.
> 
> You have showed nothing - NOTHING - that shows public support for crossbows in NY.
> 
> You haven't showed any data at all, actually.
> 
> A big ouch? More like a big snooze. You have been slapped around for 2 days with a Cornell study that you now say say is irrelevant, after you first claimed that Cornell is above reproach..
> 
> A joke. That's what you must be trying to pull. Cause you sure aren't proving anything.


Mr Source

shut up. You accomplish nothing with your ignorance and your posts are nothing more than anti hunter spam.

I am trying to learn here.

thank you

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Well, this year we did not work on any legisative initiatives


LIE - crossbow legislation is introduced every year (this year was no exception), and it gets slapped back every year.



doctariAFC said:


> The issues are fast & furious, plus fighting the anti-gunwackos has been a full time job in itself with 11 initiatives launched by the moonbats in the Assembly.


You should focus on this instead of allowing physically able season grabbers take the rewards of bowseason without the efforts of bowhunting. Much better use of your time and imagined clout.



doctariAFC said:


> The big resolution Paul Stoos specifically mentioned is crossbow legislation. We will be submitting that again next year, and, with a little luck, and a lot of hard work, we'll get it.


Why waste your resources and efforts fighting against other hunters when you could be battling moonbats? Looks like that knife cuts both ways.

Any bowhunters from NY reading these posts should remember that the state bowhunting association is NYB (NY Bowhunters), they are a member of NABC, both are staunchly opposed to crossbows in bowseasons and could use your support in dealing with money hungry season grabbers who would toss bowhunters and bowhunting under the bus to sell a few more stamps for the conservation fund.


----------



## WILLAIMSHANE

Being a Kentucky bow hunter I'm proud of the job our fish and game department dose. What I'm most proud of is the fact that every year I stand a good chance to see a 140+ class deer. I feel that if crossbows are made legal equipment during the archery season. The chances of seeing that trophy buck just got smaller


----------



## dalebow

Jim C
I hunt with longbow, recurve, muzzleloader, rifle,HOYT V-TECH COMPOUND since you didnt read my origianal post. I wouldnt be so sure your so much smarter than me either considering Iam a huntin ******* with a masters and probably make what you make in a year in about 3 months, so dont begin to think you know me.
Cross-guns are not bows, you dont hold them at full draw, you dont sight them you scope them they are for lazyyyyyyyyyyyyyy people. You can get a permit if you need it for medical reasons or you are elderly and cant pull a hunting weight bow, I also support them for kids and ladies that pull a hunting weight bow, BUT as I said any abled body man that needs a crossbow in regular archer season is a lazzzzzzzy as# and has no business tromping around the woods. 
You will never see cross-guns in P&Y nor will they ever be more than a poachers weapon:wink: 


Source

So true,we even have a guy who lost his arm in Feb this year that has retrofitted a longbow to shoot, and he is good!!!


----------



## thesource

dalebow said:


> Source
> 
> So true,we even have a guy who lost his arm in Feb this year that has retrofitted a longbow to shoot, and he is good!!!


dalebow, that is inspirational to hear. You would think that stories such as this would motivate people to learn to bowhunt....If that man can do it with one arm, they sure could do it with 2 if they would just try!:darkbeer:


----------



## JavaMan

who says the are not bows?

YOU?

I know the US Government does as do the ATA. They compete at the World Archery Festival.

It's humerous someone with no crediblilty or knowledge posts and feels who should accept his unknowledgeable opinion.

they are not even called crossguns. That word does not exist in the English Language.

if you don't know the language how can we expect you to know anything else?

JavaMan


----------



## aceoky

WILLAIMSHANE said:


> Being a Kentucky bow hunter I'm proud of the job our fish and game department dose.
> 
> As we well should be some 25 years ago seeing a deer track in much of Ky was "news" that's no longer the case and by a "long shot"
> 
> 
> What I'm most proud of is the fact that every year I stand a good chance to see a 140+ class deer.
> 
> Agreed,
> 
> I feel that if crossbows are made legal equipment during the archery season. The chances of seeing that trophy buck just got smaller


WE can't have THAT, .....why other hunters after YOUR deer!  

Just imagine, them having more opportunity to archery hunt..... 


Besides all of that , there is NO way to even try to prove that would happen......in Ky ; archery hunters kill more antlerless deer than bucks, no reason to think that would change by allowing the cb to be included.....

But remember it WAS the KDFWR that decided to expand the crossbow season to run with archery, first you say what a great job they've in fact done, now you question them?? 

Also keep in mind they(KDFWR) studied this (and all possible resources effects/affects for over 5 YEARS before moving forward with it........

So the Dept (which you are happy with the job they're in fact doing) voted TWICE to expand the cb season, .......and though you're very happy with the job they are doing with their team of wildlife biologists it REALLY comes down to hurting YOUR chances at big bucks.......Thank you!


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> LOL
> 
> Yea ouch.
> 
> First - you didn't show any evidence that Erie County Fed even SUPPORTS the crossbow, let alone that ALL 9000 people represented do.
> 
> Second - Nice link to the NYSCC's supposed support of crossbowa. Its dated 2003. Notice their reasons - _legalized use of crossbows would help increase the number of hunters as well as generate much-needed revenue for the Conservation Fund_ - don't even mention the word bow or bowhunting?
> 
> Notice that its all about money?
> 
> Yuck.
> 
> You have showed nothing - NOTHING - that shows public support for crossbows in NY.
> 
> You haven't showed any data at all, actually.
> 
> A big ouch? More like a big snooze. You have been slapped around for 2 days with a Cornell study that you now say say is irrelevant, after you first claimed that Cornell is above reproach..
> 
> A joke. That's what you must be trying to pull. Cause you sure aren't proving anything.


I love the delusional. Truly love it.

And, no, the crossbow legislation does not "come up" every year. It is up continually, in the EnCon committee, just like the dove hunting bill. Sitting on the table.

Like I said before, and I'll say it again. Its all about the politics. The survey you are holding up makes you feel good, but, again, means nothing, as this is political and nothing more. I relayed some inside information, and I get villified for it. Nice. 

Next time I'll attempt to write this stuff in Braille, so Source can get a feel for it.... 

The legislative process in NYS takes a lot of time. Heck, it took nearly 15 years to finally establish an archery season in NYS (from the time the idea was proposed). That one was a classic battle akin to the crossbow debate. Same reasons, same nonsense. It took a long time to educate, but, when the FACTS were compiled and delivered in volume in the 1950's, the hammer came down, and archery season became a reality. Doesn't surprise me in the least. Doesn't depress me, nor discourage me. The support to legalize crossbows in NYS is very, very strong. The majority favor crossbow legaliozation, but we have yet to unify behind a structure, a compormise that will move things forward.

Both sides share equal blame in that condition. But, time is on our side.


----------



## aceoky

dalebow said:


> Jim C
> I hunt with longbow, recurve, muzzleloader, rifle,HOYT V-TECH COMPOUND since you didnt read my origianal post. I wouldnt be so sure your so much smarter than me either considering Iam a huntin ******* with a masters and probably make what you make in a year in about 3 months, so dont begin to think you know me.
> Cross-guns are not bows, you dont hold them at full draw, you dont sight them you scope them they are for lazyyyyyyyyyyyyyy people. You can get a permit if you need it for medical reasons or you are elderly and cant pull a hunting weight bow, I also support them for kids and ladies that pull a hunting weight bow, BUT as I said any abled body man that needs a crossbow in regular archer season is a lazzzzzzzy as# and has no business tromping around the woods.
> 
> "YOUR woods".......
> You will never see cross-guns in P&Y nor will they ever be more than a poachers weapon:wink:
> 
> "Poaching is illegal,WHY would making the cb legal for archery hunting be needed IF that were true (it's NOT btw).....IOW, there is NO need to legalize the cb for those already breaking the law to use them (the same stupid argument used for GUN CONTROL btw)
> 
> HOW many poachers does anyone see "running around in the dark" .....following blood trails?? I know most are certainly smart enough to know poachers are going to use guns (mostly.22 rimfires, since they're fairly quiet and "get the job done".....any CO will tell you that little fact,that's also very well known).....fwiw P&Y is NOT a concern for most people and few "bowhunters" even btw.....most couldn't care less, but be careful some didnt' think the * would ever be there either, (but it IS) P&Y WILL do what they have to do .......they've already proven that to all.....
> 
> 
> Source
> 
> So true,we even have a guy who lost his arm in Feb this year that has retrofitted a longbow to shoot, and he is good!!!


That's great and is his choice, however had HE chosen to use a cb, would you be mentioning it? (either imho IS a major accomplishment and deserve equal credit fwiw)

Choice is a good thing, and with NO negative impact on the resources a great thing.......NO way to dispute any of that with actual facts.......


----------



## aceoky

Don't let source concern you DoctariAFC, most know the truth and most will consider the source (pun intended) :cocktail: 

I have little doubt that most not only believe what you're saying but are glad to have YOU on our side(the pro hunting side) of the issues at hand......I know I am.......


----------



## doctariAFC

aceoky said:


> Don't let source concern you DoctariAFC, most know the truth and most will consider the source (pun intended) :cocktail:
> 
> I have little doubt that most not only believe what you're saying but are glad to have YOU on our side(the pro hunting side) of the issues at hand......I know I am.......




:wink: 

I will continue the fight for as long as it takes. The issues are myraid, and what a challenge it is indeed in NYS, on many, many fronts. But that is truly similar to every state (although dare I say no other State is "blessed" to have New York City within its borders :mad2:!)


----------



## aceoky

Well, I feel your pain brother, and I'm happy WE don't have NYC to "deal with" for certain! :cocktail:


----------



## spec

Java- don't get in over your head. I am not trying to convince you of ANYTHING- I merely offered my opinion. I urge you not to be too quick to judge knowledge , esp on this subject in Ky. Your post count is now all the way up to twenty(several which have been totally ignored by all). This is a place to enjoy, learn and converse. Try to enjoy yourself here and we can all learn something, should that be your desire.


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> I relayed some inside information, and I get villified for it. Nice.


You relayed your opinion - I asked for evidence and have not seen it?\
Do you have evidence?




doctariAFC said:


> The majority favor crossbow legaliozation


Again, any evidence?

For a guy who constantly crows he has FACTS on hios side, you sure are being slow in providing any.

Without DATA, its just your opinion.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> You relayed your opinion - I asked for evidence and have not seen it?\
> Do you have evidence?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, any evidence?
> 
> For a guy who constantly crows he has FACTS on hios side, you sure are being slow in providing any.
> 
> Without DATA, its just your opinion.


As I explained before, and admitted, there is no printed evidence I can publish to prove the real intent behind the 1999 survey was the justification for DECALS, with the reasons behind it due to child support enforcement and building a firearms/ hunter database. Believe me, if I did, and could, I would.

In terms of the evidence concerning the support for crossbows, I have posted it. NYSCC supports crossbows, and they represent the 50-some odd county Federations across NYS. The majority of Federations voted to support the resolution, hence the support from the NYSCC. The Federations get their yeah or nay position from each member club's vote, and each club's position is determined by a vote of the membership on the issues.

I cannot believe I just had to explain the Democratic system to you. You saw it in writing, and you saw the letter the NYSCC put forth for all to use to write in. Trouble is apathy. Not enough letters. That is a consistent and true condition no matter the issue, and this is why my single biggest wish for sportsmen everywhere is for more hunters and anglers to join federated sportsmens clubs and get freaking educated and involved.


----------



## aceoky

dalebow said:


> , BUT as I said any abled body man that needs a crossbow in regular archer season is a lazzzzzzzy as# and has no business tromping around the woods.


HOW do YOU know they're "lazy"? Maybe they work two jobs supporting their family and don't have time to become "good enough" to have the confidence to try bow hunting.......OR maybe they just never could shoot one "good enough" or maybe........ "lots' of other real possibilties......

But let's "run with" YOUR "logic" ; those using 99 % "let off" compounds are 1% "less lazy" than those using a cb??? Kinda "splitting hairs" now aren't ya??:cocktail: 


Most would agree it's better for all of US(archery hunters and hunters in general)..... to have anyone who doesn't (for whatever reasons, A.) practice enough, B.) who's not a "good enough" shot with another bow to use a cb and cleanly kill big game than to use another weapon and risk (a very real risk btw) wounding them......

Some would still try to convince anyone that would read it, they're not deserving unless they take that very real risk, 

I'd rather they did not take it and use the weapon they're "best with", including a cb or compound.....there is NO "regulations" that a "bowhunter" in KY must be able to "hit" "X" number of "bulls" before he/she can hunt, NOR that they must provide proof of "practice time".... so, anyone who wants to can now be a "real bowhunter" which actually doesn't help the "entitled" concept one bit.....

....thus , just "using a real bow" doesn't prove "squat" to most who have been around bowhunting for any length of time (don't believe me, visit an archery shop the last three days before season starts, spend some REAL time there watching, you'll most likely learn something and one of those things is; many who are going out with a "bow" shouldn't be.....a cb would be a MUCH better choice for them.....and it is only a choice , NO ONE is being forced to use one that doesn't wish to do so.....MOST "able bodied men" wouldn't use one, and most who try them, likely would find they like archery season, and learn to use another bow......which "in the end" is good for everyone involved, more hunters = more political clout, etc.etc.etc.

Some in reality want to exclude other hunters and try every excuse "in the book" (and invent new ones not therein) :cocktail:


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> As I explained before, and admitted, there is no printed evidence I can publish to prove the real intent behind the 1999 survey was the justification for DECALS, with the reasons behind it due to child support enforcement and building a firearms/ hunter database. Believe me, if I did, and could, I would.


So the answer is no. You have no evidence. We are just supposed to believe your freakish conspiracy theories.:der: 



doctariAFC said:


> In terms of the evidence concerning the support for crossbows, I have posted it. NYSCC supports crossbows, and they represent the 50-some odd county Federations across NYS. The majority of Federations voted to support the resolution, hence the support from the NYSCC. The Federations get their yeah or nay position from each member club's vote, and each club's position is determined by a vote of the membership on the issues.


Again - no evidence that the majority of NY sportsmen support crossbows.

You have some shown some cursory evidence that the beauracracy of hunting groups filled with self important people support crossbows - so what? You also showed they are in for the money - surprise, surprise. Adding to the conservation fund is something you always talk about - more beauracracy.

You stated the majority of NY sportsmen, not huff-n-puff political wannabees - PROVE it.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> MOST "able bodied men" wouldn't use one, and most who try them, likely would find they like archery season, and learn to use another bow......which "in the end" is good for everyone involved, more hunters = more political clout, etc.etc.etc.


EVIDENCE, please ......

OH statistics would tend to disprove your hypothesis.....


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> So the answer is no. You have no evidence. We are just supposed to believe your freakish conspiracy theories.:der:
> 
> 
> 
> Again - no evidence that the majority of NY sportsmen support crossbows.
> 
> You have some shown some cursory evidence that the beauracracy of hunting groups filled with self important people support crossbows - so what? You also showed they are in for the money - surprise, surprise. Adding to the conservation fund is something you always talk about - more beauracracy.
> 
> You stated the majority of NY sportsmen, not huff-n-puff political wannabees - PROVE it.


Source...... Are you that challenged you cannot find these websites?? The information?

Here you go - two provisions from 2004...

A 9746 Crouch (MS) Provides that disabled persons may utilize a crossbow in the taking of big game or small game, provided that they submit their disability status to the department *NYSCC SUPPORT *



A 5011 DelMonte Same as S 1333 MAZIARZ - -Authorizes the DEC to promulgate standards authorizing hunting with a crossbow by July 1, 2005 . *NYSCC SUPPORT* It was mentioned that another bill will be brought forth that will set guidelines for a special stamp for crossbow, the season it can be used and other details that might be agreeable to all sides. As of this meeting a bill has not been put forth, but when there is information it will be included in future legislative reports.) 


You have been schooled now.

Methinks Source doesn't know who the NYSCC is, so, more schooling....

http://www.nyscc.com/member.htm

You may go ahead and research for yourself the member clubs in each and every Federation. Substantially more sportsmen and women than the 6,000 (less than) you are touting, rbother. 

To not know about the structure and the organizations prtecting hunting and fishing and 2nd Amendment rights on behalf of NY sportsmen is truly depressing.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> EVIDENCE, please ......
> 
> OH statistics would tend to disprove your hypothesis.....


Yeah sure they would, even Marvin admits to moving on from a crossbow (which he states he started with NOW uses another bow) ...... BTW it's "right here" for ALL to see.....


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Source...... Are you that challenged you cannot find these websites?? The information?


More personal attacks, Doc? Such a sweetie.....




doctariAFC said:


> You may go ahead and research for yourself the member clubs in each and every Federation. Substantially more sportsmen and women than the 6,000 (less than) you are touting, rbother.
> 
> To not know about the structure and the organizations prtecting hunting and fishing and 2nd Amendment rights on behalf of NY sportsmen is truly depressing.


I have no interest in your self serving member clubs.

Your clubs are a fraction of the sporting men and women in NY. The NYSCC is but a fraction of the sporting men and women of NYS.

YOU yourself stated that Cornell surveys are not challengeable, above reproach. Your insistence that your federation's representation of more mmembers than were surveyed shows your lack of knowledge about statistics and representative samples. It is FAR more likely that Cornell's random sampling of all types of license holders is representative of the state population than those who participate in the Erie chapter, for example.

We'll chalk this one up to naivety and ignorance of statistical processes, and not to you being intentionally misleading.

Consider _yourself _schooled.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Yeah sure they would, even Marvin admits to moving on from a crossbow (which he states he started with NOW uses another bow) ...... BTW it's "right here" for ALL to see.....



 

I see - since you know ONE who did, somehow that magically translates into "most"?

Take another toke, dude.

Crossbows in OH have grown at an astounding rate, while vertical bow useage has increased at a fraction of that. xbows outnumber bows 3:2 and growing.

If you were even CLOSE to being right, it would be mathmatically impossible for xbows to outnumber bows.

Quite simply - you are WRONG.


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> WE can't have THAT, .....why other hunters after YOUR deer!
> 
> Just imagine, them having more opportunity to archery hunt.....
> 
> 
> Besides all of that , there is NO way to even try to prove that would happen......in Ky ; archery hunters kill more antlerless deer than bucks, no reason to think that would change by allowing the cb to be included.....
> 
> But remember it WAS the KDFWR that decided to expand the crossbow season to run with archery, first you say what a great job they've in fact done, now you question them??
> 
> Also keep in mind they(KDFWR) studied this (and all possible resources effects/affects for over 5 YEARS before moving forward with it........
> 
> So the Dept (which you are happy with the job they're in fact doing) voted TWICE to expand the cb season, .......and though you're very happy with the job they are doing with their team of wildlife biologists it REALLY comes down to hurting YOUR chances at big bucks.......Thank you!



Ace - Not to burst your bubble, but KDFWR did NOT study xbows for 5 years before voting on it. It was indeed voted down in the past, but when the initial 2005 vote was taken in March, they hadn't examined ANY data until less than ONE month (that's 30 days) before the meeting. In fact, they were waiting on data from several states when the vote was taken. 

Second, you keep saying that xbows will induce "new hunters" into the sport. That point, my friend, is highly debatable. If you look at Ohio, which has allowed xbows since 1970-something, here are some startling figures:

1993 - 527,335 hunting license sales
2003 - 425,992 hunting license sales.
(the source was some article from the Lima, Ohio paper)

The Nat'l Wildlife Group (which is not anti-hunting) reported that Ohio's deer hunters had declined more than 20% from 1991-2001. 

On the flip side, KDFWR has stated that hunter numbers in KY, a non-xbow state, have remained "stable". 

"Typically what we see is about a 2percent decline in hunter numbers every time there is a license (fee) increase," said Jonathan Day, large-game program coordinator for the Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. "In Kentucky we're actually pretty stable right now, but nationwide we know hunter numbers are declining." Courier-Journal 2004

In the end, I think this at least lends some support (although I certainly wouldn't say conclusive by any means) to the argument that xbow season expansions are NOT really about bringing women and kids into the sport as much as it is to provide an easier method of hunting for existing hunters that for whatever reason would rather shoot a xbow than a bow.


----------



## Jim C

dalebow said:


> Jim C
> I hunt with longbow, recurve, muzzleloader, rifle,HOYT V-TECH COMPOUND since you didnt read my origianal post. I wouldnt be so sure your so much smarter than me either considering Iam a huntin ******* with a masters and probably make what you make in a year in about 3 months, so dont begin to think you know me.


that's funny but having a BA from Yale, A JD and a MS in Labor Relations from Cornell I suspect that alone ought to clue you that you really don't want to go there. You are going to look even more stupid. I just saw you are an emergency room nurse. I defend the VA in civil suits-I know what people like you make. Trust me, you aren't even close




dalebow said:


> Cross-guns are not bows, you dont hold them at full draw, you dont sight them you scope them they are for lazyyyyyyyyyyyyyy people. You can get a permit if you need it for medical reasons or you are elderly and cant pull a hunting weight bow, I also support them for kids and ladies that pull a hunting weight bow, BUT as I said any abled body man that needs a crossbow in regular archer season is a lazzzzzzzy as# and has no business tromping around the woods.
> You will never see cross-guns in P&Y nor will they ever be more than a poachers weapon:wink:


. 

More ignorant stupidity. What is a "crossgun"? a term that the uneducated use in an attempt to sway the weakminded. You don't hold a compound at full draw fully. And who cares? How does it affect you other than interfering with your clear ego problems and self esteem issues. Why does any able bodied man need a compound? I have two busted discs and a bunch of bone taken from my shoulder and I still can shoot a 50 pound target recurve 50 shots in a row. If I can why can't guys with no problems? ARE THEY LAZY or does your sense of "worth" have a certain price? As to poachers, most of them use a 22 caliber rifle so I will chalk up your ignorance to the fact you aren't a game manager or a prosecuting attorney.




dalebow said:


> Source
> 
> So true,we even have a guy who lost his arm in Feb this year that has retrofitted a longbow to shoot, and he is good!!!


Not relevant-you and your ilk should spend more time worrying about your own recreational activities and stop pretending you are better than others. I have a hint for you, you aren't a good or better hunter because you call people you have never met-thousands of them "lazy". Many of them are better men and better hunters than you could hope to be


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> More personal attacks, Doc? Such a sweetie.....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no interest in your self serving member clubs.
> 
> Your clubs are a fraction of the sporting men and women in NY. The NYSCC is but a fraction of the sporting men and women of NYS.
> 
> YOU yourself stated that Cornell surveys are not challengeable, above reproach. Your insistence that your federation's representation of more mmembers than were surveyed shows your lack of knowledge about statistics and representative samples. It is FAR more likely that Cornell's random sampling of all types of license holders is representative of the state population than those who participate in the Erie chapter, for example.
> 
> We'll chalk this one up to naivety and ignorance of statistical processes, and not to you being intentionally misleading.
> 
> Consider _yourself _schooled.


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Ace - Not to burst your bubble, but KDFWR did NOT study xbows for 5 years before voting on it.
> 
> 1. Purpose The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) has received *numerous requests over the past 5 years *to extend the crossbow-hunting season. Additionally, the KDFWR recognizes a need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large percentage of the state. In 2002, the KDFWR conducted a hunter survey that was mailed to 13,500 hunters in Kentucky – “What do you think about the use of crossbows during archery season?” Using the data from the survey *and with the knowledge that an extended crossbow-hunting season would not have a negative impact on the resource,* KDFWR recently proposed an extension of the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkeys from the historical framework of a 10-day season to running at the same time as archery season (first Saturday in Sept. through the third Monday in Jan.). YOU should know where that comes from, guess it says they in fact did study it .......
> 
> 
> 
> It was indeed voted down in the past, but when the initial 2005 vote was taken in March, they hadn't examined ANY data until less than ONE month (that's 30 days) before the meeting. In fact, they were waiting on data from several states when the vote was taken.
> 
> I'm speaking of KY data, not from other states
> 
> Second, you keep saying that xbows will induce "new hunters" into the sport. That point, my friend, is highly debatable.
> 
> it has done exactly that in Tenn. among others NO debate there
> 
> 
> 
> If you look at Ohio, which has allowed xbows since 1970-something, here are some startling figures:
> 
> 1993 - 527,335 hunting license sales
> 2003 - 425,992 hunting license sales.
> (the source was some article from the Lima, Ohio paper)
> 
> The Nat'l Wildlife Group (which is not anti-hunting) reported that Ohio's deer hunters had declined more than 20% from 1991-2001.
> 
> On the flip side, KDFWR has stated that hunter numbers in KY, a non-xbow state, have remained "stable".
> 
> "Typically what we see is about a 2percent decline in hunter numbers every time there is a license (fee) increase," said Jonathan Day, large-game program coordinator for the Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. "In Kentucky we're actually pretty stable right now, but nationwide we know hunter numbers are declining." Courier-Journal 2004
> 
> In the end, I think this at least lends some support (although I certainly wouldn't say conclusive by any means) to the argument that xbow season expansions are NOT really about bringing women and kids into the sport as much as it is to provide an easier method of hunting for existing hunters that for whatever reason would rather shoot a xbow than a bow.


MORE to follow very soon......


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> I see - since you know ONE who did, somehow that magically translates into "most"?
> 
> NO, just one of your "allies" has stated the fact right here, I happen to know some in Tenn personally that have already made the "switch".......prepare for some more "schooling" also
> 
> Take another toke, dude.
> 
> I think you should "lay off" the stuff, but that's only my opinion....
> 
> Crossbows in OH have grown at an astounding rate, while *vertical bow useage has increased *at a fraction of that. xbows outnumber bows 3:2 and growing.
> 
> Hang in there, we'll soon see about all of that (and Ballard's information also........plus IF vertical bow usage is still increasing once again YOU have shot yourself in the foot yet again....
> 
> If you were even CLOSE to being right, it would be mathmatically impossible for xbows to outnumber bows.
> 
> Nope because once again those who don't like guns for whatever reason OR can't shoot another bow or whatever that proves it's a "good thing", and btw they are still archery hunters......we all know this fact
> 
> Quite simply - you are WRONG.


Well, coming from YOU the expert of being wrong, I'd almost have to accept that, yet somehow I don't.....please stand by......:cocktail:


----------



## doctariAFC

aceoky said:


> Well, coming from YOU the expert of being wrong, I'd almost have to accept that, yet somehow I don't.....please stand by......:cocktail:


Ya know, that's funny.... :chortle:

I guess Source missed the FACT that NY Bowhunters is a member of the Erie County Federation (they have reps at all the Federations, I do believe) AND they are an affiliate member of the NYSCC, or, in other words, PART of the NYSCC. It ain't the other way around.

:confused3: 

  :chortle: :chortle:

So, in the process of attempting to discredit the importance of the FACTS of the majority, he has discredited the NYB..... WOW.... 

Expert indeed..... :doh:

I see NYSOWA in there, too.... WOW

Keep it coming......


----------



## aceoky

Crossbow Impact in Ohio - another myth debunked!


Jim,



It certainly has been more than a week, and I apologize for the delay in getting back to you. I had some unexpected “obligations” fill up my schedule. I do hope the delay wasn’t an inconvenience for you. Before I attempt to address what role, if any, crossbow hunting has played in the “evolution” of the deer hunter and deer hunting in Ohio, I think its appropriate to first take a look at trends in hunter numbers over the past several decades. 



Trends in Licensed Deer Hunter and Hunter Numbers…



As you can see from the figure below, both are declining, but the number of licensed hunters is dropping at a much sharper rate. 
Hunter numbers have been steadily declining since at least since the late 1970s. 

In spite of this trend, the number of licensed deer hunters gradually increased through at least 2003. They now appear to be on the decline or at the very best, holding steady since 2003. Based on these trends, I think it is fair to say at least two things:



1) deer hunting participation has probably peaked



2) We should probably plan on a gradual erosion of our hunter base. This is a national trend. Of course, the offshoot of this is that licensed deer hunter numbers will also likely decline, unless participation rates increase. 

The take home message is that licensed deer hunter numbers grew rapidly through the late 1980s, peaked in the early to mid-1990s, and have been relatively flat or declining slightly in this decade, in spite of rather significant declines in numbers of licensed hunters. 



I should point out that deer hunting participation rate estimates prior to 2001 were based on surveys. Current estimates are based on an analysis of both license and permit sales data, as well as surveys. 


One other noteworthy point related to the decline in licensed hunters, and similarly licensed deer hunters, is the “trend” in hunting participation by landowners. 

As you may know, landowners and their spouse and children hunt free on their own property. 
As you can see from the figure below, the landowner portion of the deer harvest has increased significantly over the past decade. This trend, as well as the increase in the number of nonresident deer hunters, has helped to offset the decline in Ohio’s licensed deer hunters. 




We have also seen greater participation by youth hunters over the past 5 years. The number of youth deer hunters peaked in 2003 and has dropped slightly the past 2 seasons.



In the end, I would be very comfortable saying that the number of deer hunters, including licensed (including residents and nonresidents) and landowners, youths, as well as seniors, probably mirrors the trend in numbers of licensed deer hunters that I presented above. Deer hunter numbers expanded through the late 1980s, peaked somewhere in the latter part of the last decade or early in the current decade and have been stable or declining slightly since then. 





Trends in Participation and Harvest by Season…



There is no question that bow hunting continues to see the greatest growth among all implement types. 

A recent study completed (nearly completed I should say) at The Ohio State University, found that some 43% of all avid hunters hunted with a crossbow at least once during the 4-year period from 2001-2004. That is up from approximately 30% in 2001. 

Longbow (everything that is not a crossbow) participation increased from 28% in 2001 to nearly 36%. 

Finally, an estimated 63% and 85% of hunters participated at least once during the statewide muzzleloader and shotgun seasons, respectively. Our deer hunter survey in 2001 put these estimates closer to 49% and 79%, respectively. As you would expect, harvest trends have tracked this shift in participation. Our so-called “primitive” seasons have grown increasingly popular with our hunters over the past 25 years. From the table below you can see that in 1980, the archery and muzzleloader seasons collectively accounted for < 15% of the total annual deer harvest. Today, that figure is approaching 40%! 



Year
% of Total Deer Harvest


Statewide Muzzleloader Season
Archery season

1980
6
8

1990
6
12

2000
12
23

2004
11
28






With that out of the way, let’s see if we’ve gotten any closer to answering your question regarding the history of crossbow hunting and its impact on deer hunting here in Ohio.



First and foremost, *as you have just seen, licensed deer hunter numbers here in Ohio have only recently begun to show signs of declining. * (Interesting.....and NOT what was just posted by others though is it now?

This decline is not unique to OH. 

It is occurring nationally and since Ohio is one of only a handful of states where the crossbow is legal, you would have a tough time convincing me that the crossbow is to blame for the recent decline in deer hunter numbers in Ohio. Imagine THAT!

In fact, given the trends in crossbow hunting participation (see below) the crossbow is *undoubtedly at least partly responsible for the positive trends in deer hunter number over the past 25 years. *

But what about the impact on vertical bow archers? Has the rising popularity of the crossbow contributed to decline in vertical bow hunter numbers?





Some Facts on Crossbow Harvest and Hunters in Ohio…



1) Since 1982, crossbow hunters have been permitted to hunt the entire 4-month archery season. 



2) In 1989, the crossbow harvest exceeded the vertical bow harvest for the first time and today accounts for nearly 60% of the total archery *harvest.* 

3) In the early 1980s, < 5% of licensed deer hunters hunted with a crossbow. Today, > 40% of licensed deer hunters hunt at least once a season with a crossbow. 



Crossbow and vertical bow (bow) participation rates among licensed deer hunters for select periods, 1980s to present.


Early 1980s



Late 1980s



Early 1990s



Late 1990s



2005




CB
Bow



CB
Bow



CB
Bow

CB
Bow

CB
Bow

Hunter participation (%)
5
35



15
29



29
29



32
29



43
36






Without question, the number of crossbow hunters and the deer that they harvest each year has grown nearly annually since crossbows were legalized in 1976. But, what about vertical bow archers? Have these trends led to a decline in vertical bow hunter numbers as some would suggest?



Some Facts on Vertical Hunters in Ohio…



1) In the early 1980s, an estimated 35% of licensed deer hunters hunted with a vertical bow. If we apply this to our 1978 hunter number estimate (see chart above), we had roughly 64,000 (0.35x184,000) vertical bow archers in the early 1980s.



2) Based on a study conducted March of 2005, an estimated 36% of approximately 300,000 licensed deer hunters or roughly 110,000 archers hunted with a vertical bow at least once from 2001-2004. 





Granted, the vertical bow has not enjoyed the growth in popularity that the crossbow has. 

However, and this is most relevant to the discussion at hand - the number of vertical bow archers has not declined until just recently! 

*The percent of hunters who hunt with a compound has fluctuated very little and the absolute number of hunters who hunt with a compound has actually increased over the past 25 years, in spite of the crossbow’s popularity! * 




I think you should have your answer. First, we have only recently seen a slip in licensed deer hunter numbers. 

Up until this point, the number of licensed *deer hunters actually increased*, in spite of a loss in total hunter numbers. Participation rates increased sharply among remaining hunters. *The same can be said for vertical bow hunter numbers. 

*

There are a lot of myths circulating about the crossbow. *It should now be apparent that this one is also just that – a myth. *


For each myth there is 1 very valid justification for legalizing the crossbow in Ohio in 1976. Among those is the fact that it is an excellent management tool, it provides millions of *hunter days of opportunity *each year (see chart below), and its popularity has helped to maintain overall deer hunter numbers. 

And of course, it goes without saying that hunters are essential to deer management. Many of these crossbow hunters also hunt and kill deer with other weapon types. Without them, management would be that much more difficult.



I hope that I have been some help to you. If you need clarification, or perhaps additional information, please don’t hesitate to drop me a note.



Very best,



Mike Tonkovich, 
Wildlife Biologist,
Ohio DNR




Please be sure and note that all of my deer hunter number figures apply exclusively to regular licensed adults. They do not include youth, seniors, or landowners.





Year
Trends in Hunter Days of Opportunity (millions)


Crossbow
Vertical bow

1981
0.11
1.76

1986
0.5
1.22

1992
1.6
1.90

2002
1.8
1.8

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

An email (one of a "few" btw) I recieved from the OHIO DNR.... after asking them IF the "information" being posted was in fact true, obviously it's not even close.......

I'm sorry the graphs don't show properly, but most can see what they say???

As many can see, as stated, the myths are debunked!

Thank YOU Mike, I appreciate it very much!


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Ace - Not to burst your bubble, but KDFWR did NOT study xbows for 5 years before voting on it. It was indeed voted down in the past, but when the initial 2005 vote was taken in March, they hadn't examined ANY data until less than ONE month (that's 30 days) before the meeting. In fact, they were waiting on data from several states when the vote was taken.
> 
> Second, you keep saying that xbows will induce "new hunters" into the sport. That point, my friend, is highly debatable. If you look at Ohio, which has allowed xbows since 1970-something, here are some startling figures:
> 
> 1993 - 527,335 hunting license sales
> 2003 - 425,992 hunting license sales.
> (the source was some article from the Lima, Ohio paper)
> 
> 
> NOT DEER hunters though, as I've proven with the data just provided (as promised, though I had to put another computer back together to access that email, it was 'well worth it" :cocktail:
> 
> The Nat'l Wildlife Group (which is not anti-hunting) reported that Ohio's deer hunters had declined more than 20% from 1991-2001.
> 
> Again bad information at best.....at any rate also disproven from the OHIO DNR
> 
> On the flip side, KDFWR has stated that hunter numbers in KY, a non-xbow state, have remained "stable".
> 
> "Typically what we see is about a 2percent decline in hunter numbers every time there is a license (fee) increase," said Jonathan Day, large-game program coordinator for the Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. "In Kentucky we're actually pretty stable right now, but nationwide we know hunter numbers are declining." Courier-Journal 2004
> 
> Even MORE reason to support expansion, why wait for us to be "in trouble" to act???
> 
> In the end, I think this at least lends some support (although I certainly wouldn't say conclusive by any means) to the argument that xbow season expansions are NOT really about bringing women and kids into the sport as much as it is to provide an easier method of hunting for existing hunters that for whatever reason would rather shoot a xbow than a bow.


I think it's a very real way to bring in NEW hunters (especially, women, youth and seniors, who as a "whole" don't like guns much, and also don't like the colder weather, just as has been happening in Tenn, for only one example.....guess we'll soon see (albeit with a much shorter season than expected)


----------



## JavaMan

doctariAFC said:


> Ya know, that's funny.... :chortle:
> 
> I guess Source missed the FACT that NY Bowhunters is a member of the Erie County Federation (they have reps at all the Federations, I do believe) AND they are an affiliate member of the NYSCC, or, in other words, PART of the NYSCC. It ain't the other way around.
> 
> :confused3:
> 
> :chortle: :chortle:
> 
> So, in the process of attempting to discredit the importance of the FACTS of the majority, he has discredited the NYB..... WOW....
> 
> Expert indeed..... :doh:
> 
> I see NYSOWA in there, too.... WOW
> 
> Keep it coming......


I enjoy Mr Source too. He's so ignorant and preservering he's comical and a bit pathetic. This thread is entertaining.

:laugh:  

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Ya know, that's funny.... :chortle:
> 
> I guess Source missed the FACT that NY Bowhunters is a member of the Erie County Federation (they have reps at all the Federations, I do believe) AND they are an affiliate member of the NYSCC, or, in other words, PART of the NYSCC. It ain't the other way around.


That just proves you are twisiing the truth, doesn't it?

Your stating that Erie County Federations supports crossbows because its 9000 members do is a pretty far stretch since 99.9% of NYB members oppose the crossbow...this is from their website:

_A survey of NYB membership opposed the introduction of the crossbow during any hunting season, which is consistent with the current law, by a margin of 99.9%._

Once again your misrepresentation has been exposed. ukey:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> That just proves you are twisiing the truth, doesn't it?
> 
> Your stating that Erie County Federations supports crossbows because its 9000 members do is a pretty far stretch since 99.9% of NYB members oppose the crossbow...this is from their website:
> 
> _A survey of NYB membership opposed the introduction of the crossbow during any hunting season, which is consistent with the current law, by a margin of 99.9%._
> 
> Once again your misrepresentation has been exposed. ukey:


this is more a sad testament to the state of intelligence of that group more than anything else source


----------



## Free Range

> One could "assume" many things, that doesn't make them true, just as your "assumptions" on the wording of the survey were NOT close to true...(among many other things you have so far "assumed" incorrectly to this point)......


Well Ace, then tell us how allowing the xb in archery season, for choice, for expanded opportunity, for added income to the state, for the old, young and females, is any different then adding “remote” or “internet” hunting for those same reasons. Why is your added opportunity better then someone else’s added opportunity? 



> Some however do need to be answered in spite of my attmepts to "mend fences" as much as is possible......period



    

Now that is without a doubt the funniest thing you have said to date. YOU? MEND FENCES?????


----------



## Jim C

Its so funny seeing the "I'm superior because I use this bow" cult try to link expanding bowhunting through the introduction of an easier to learn but no more effective xbow with internet "hunting".

since its the tactic of the excluders to lump expanding archery opportunities through crossbows with internet "hunting" I guess its only fair to lump those who wish to limit hunting opportunities with PETA


----------



## Free Range

Nice post Ace, did you bother to read this before you posted it? First let me point out that this report is not allowed in this debate, 1) because it is only the opinion of someone, no real facts to back up anything said, and 2) you didn’t post a link where this could be verified, LOL




> The take home message is that licensed deer hunter numbers grew rapidly through the late 1980s, peaked in the early to mid-1990s, and have been relatively flat or declining slightly in this decade, in spite of rather significant declines in numbers of licensed hunters


.

Or declining in this decade?? Interesting, how could this be, I thought you said it brings new people in? 



> We have also seen greater participation by youth hunters over the past 5 years. The number of youth deer hunters peaked in 2003 and has dropped slightly the past 2 seasons.


Dropped in the last 2 seasons, YOUTHS, I thought this was specifically for youth? 



> It is occurring nationally and since Ohio is one of only a handful of states where the crossbow is legal, you would have a tough time convincing me that the crossbow is to blame for the recent decline in deer hunter numbers in Ohio. Imagine THAT!


Has anyone said the xb causes decline, maybe, but it hasn’t been used much that I can remember. Nice Ace taking credit for something that doesn’t even exist



> In fact, given the trends in crossbow hunting participation (see below) the crossbow is undoubtedly at least partly responsible for the positive trends in deer hunter number over the past 25 years.


Great opinion, but any thinking person would see that over the past 25 years, there has been numerous explosive events in deer hunting, that have undoubtedly so over shadowed the xb’s supposed action in this as to make this above statement completely laughable. 



> Granted, the vertical bow has not enjoyed the growth in popularity that the crossbow has.


One can only wonder what that growth would have been without the xb



> However, and this is most relevant to the discussion at hand - the number of vertical bow archers has not declined until just recently!


But they have, just recently. Now he gives all or most of the credit to the xb, when it looks good to do so, but doesn’t give any of the blame to it when it might just as well be. 



> The percent of hunters who hunt with a compound has fluctuated very little and the absolute number of hunters who hunt with a compound has actually increased over the past 25 years, in spite of the crossbow’s popularity!


Hmmm, could it have anything to do with the advancement in compounds over that same time period? Funny how he overlooks all the other events that have occurred over the last 25 years. 



> Up until this point, the number of licensed deer hunters actually increased, in spite of a loss in total hunter numbers. Participation rates increased sharply among remaining hunters. The same can be said for vertical bow hunter numbers.


Up to this point, (read they are now decreasing) could it have anything to do with deer herds growing, deer hunting being popularized, deer hunting becoming easier, deer hunting tactics changing taking some of the mystique out of deer hunting and people being not so intimidated by it and giving it a try? 



> For each myth there is 1 very valid justification for legalizing the crossbow in Ohio in 1976. Among those is the fact that it is an excellent management tool, it provides millions of hunter days of opportunity each year (see chart below), and its popularity has helped to maintain overall deer hunter numbers.


Nothing the bow doesn’t already do, the same opportunity to get out there and hunt is and has always been there, to attribute this solely to the xb, is misleading at best.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> That just proves you are twisiing the truth, doesn't it?
> 
> Your stating that Erie County Federations supports crossbows because its 9000 members do is a pretty far stretch since 99.9% of NYB members oppose the crossbow...this is from their website:
> 
> _A survey of NYB membership opposed the introduction of the crossbow during any hunting season, which is consistent with the current law, by a margin of 99.9%._
> 
> Once again your misrepresentation has been exposed. ukey:


What this proves is you do not understand how the parliamentary process works. SO I'll enlighten you...

Delegates from each ECFSC member club carry with them the vote on any resolution from their Club. Individual club sizes range from @ 100 members to nearly 3,000 members (Southtowns Walleye Assn is the largest club in the Federation, by far). Each club recieves delegate representation according to the size of their club, much like how the House of Representatives work in Congress.

Then, at the Federation meeting, the delegates are polled for their club's position. You know... All in favor - Aye, All Opposed - Nay. Then the ayes and nays are tabulated and the official position of Erie County or any other Federation is determined. That becomes the official position of the Federation, and the Federation's delegates to the New York State Conservation Council carries with them the position of their Federation to the State meeting, and the process starts again to determine the position of the State body. 

Source, if anyone should strongly consider goping to your County Federation meetings, listening and learning, it is you. The experience will no doubt be beneficial to you, it will open your eyes to the myriad of issues we contend with, and, at the very least, some of your blatant ignorance would be removed. Its a win-win for you. I truly recommend it. If you do not belong to a Federated Club, join one. Attend the meetings. They usually happen once a month. Attend the Federation Meetings - Once a month also. Make the time, make the commitment. It is well worth it.

Just a word of advice so you have a heads up... The meetings can be very dry and boring. They can also be long and heated. You will also realize the sheer number of issues and areas we are involved in. Fisheries Advisory Boards, Citizen Deer management Boards, Environmental Planning Commissions, Fish stocking efforts, Pheasant stocking efforts, youth program initiatives, County and State Fair participation, Law Enforcement relations, Conservation Fund Advisory Board participation, waterfowl and wetlands planning and conservation, trapping, pollution, etc, etc. the list is long and the issues are many.

Perhaps you're too myopic for the work. I can understand that. Perhaps you rely upon others to protect your rights for you. The majority of hunters and anglers do just that. But, to be frank, you really could use the education. I hate seeing so much ignorance rolled up in one hunter. Get involved in Region 8. Get with your county's Federation through one of the member clubs. It is time and energy well spent.


----------



## thesource

More insults....good thing I have a thick skin.

You are dodging the issue. You stated that you represent a majority of the sportsmen in WNY - you don't. 



doctariAFC said:


> Delegates from each ECFSC member club carry with them the vote on any resolution from their Club. Individual club sizes range from @ 100 members to nearly 3,000 members (Southtowns Walleye Assn is the largest club in the Federation, by far). Each club recieves delegate representation according to the size of their club, much like how the House of Representatives work in Congress.



Spectacular. 3000 Walleye fishermen get the dominant say in what happens during bowseason..... you still aren't getting it. 

You want us to believe that your federation (and others) is the be all and end all, the voice of the NY sportsmen. Its not. 

The Cornell survey does a much better job of statistically representing the will of NY hunters than the handful of representatives of 3000 walleye fisherman from Buffalo.

You label me ignorant simply because I do not support your view that the federations drive NY states sporting regulations - I'm not. They, and the NYSCC, are part of the process - they are not the entire process.

You have an annoying habit of over-glorifying the groups and things you participate in. They are important, but they are not the only means to the end.




doctariAFC said:


> Perhaps you're too myopic for the work. I can understand that. Perhaps you rely upon others to protect your rights for you.


Perhaps not. Perhaps I have found other methods to support (and defend) the sport that we both care about. Not all of us require the attention and publicity that you do while we support hunting and hunting rights

Your political organizations are but a single method of achieving the goal.

You would be wise to consider that there are others.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> More insults....good thing I have a thick skin.
> 
> You are dodging the issue. You stated that you represent a majority of the sportsmen in WNY - you don't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spectacular. 3000 Walleye fishermen get the dominant say in what happens during bowseason..... you still aren't getting it.
> 
> You want us to believe that your federation (and others) is the be all and end all, the voice of the NY sportsmen. Its not.
> 
> The Cornell survey does a much better job of statistically representing the will of NY hunters than the handful of representatives of 3000 walleye fisherman from Buffalo.
> 
> You label me ignorant simply because I do not support your view that the federations drive NY states sporting regulations - I'm not. They, and the NYSCC, are part of the process - they are not the entire process.
> 
> You have an annoying habit of over-glorifying the groups and things you participate in. They are important, but they are not the only means to the end.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps not. Perhaps I have found other methods to support (and defend) the sport that we both care about. Not all of us require the attention and publicity that you do while we support hunting and hunting rights
> 
> Your political organizations are but a single method of achieving the goal.
> 
> You would be wise to consider that there are others.


Source. You are clueless. I truly pity you.....


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> I think it's a very real way to bring in NEW hunters (especially, women, youth and seniors, who as a "whole" don't like guns much, and also don't like the colder weather, just as has been happening in Tenn, for only one example.....guess we'll soon see (albeit with a much shorter season than expected)


I read through your letter. It was tough to read the graphs, but I still can't figure out whether deer hunter numbers are increasing, staying stable or decreasing in Ohio. This letter is all over the board as to when Ohio's deer hunter numbers increased, decreased and stayed stable. I'm also not sure where the data from NWF is wrong. NWF said that deer hunter #'s declined by 20% from 1991-2001, and I see nothing in here that says that's not true. Here's some excerpts that led to my confusion. . . .

"Hunter numbers have been steadily declining since at least since the late 1970s. *In spite of this trend, the number of licensed deer hunters gradually increased through at least 2003. They now appear to be on the decline or at the very best, holding steady since 2003*."

"*The take home message is that licensed deer hunter numbers grew rapidly through the late 1980s, peaked in the early to mid-1990s, and have been relatively flat or declining slightly in this decade, in spite of rather significant declines in numbers of licensed hunters.*"

"First and foremost, as you have just seen, licensed deer hunter numbers here in Ohio have *only recently *begun to show signs of declining."

"*Deer hunter numbers expanded through the late 1980s, peaked somewhere in the latter part of the last decade or early in the current decade and have been stable or declining slightly since then*."

"One other noteworthy point related to the decline in licensed hunters, and similarly licensed deer hunters, is the “trend” in hunting participation by landowners. As you may know, landowners and their spouse and children hunt free on their own property. As you can see from the figure below, the landowner portion of the deer harvest has increased significantly over the past decade. *This trend, as well as the increase in the number of nonresident deer hunters, has helped to offset the decline in Ohio’s licensed deer hunters.*"

In any event, from what I could tell, he was trying to say that the number of deer hunters increased during the 1980's-early 1990's and then have declined somewhat since then. If I'm correct, these trends in Ohio appear to be similar to what occurred in virtually every other midwestern state, including non-xbow states. In KY, the deer hunter numbers have remained "stable", and we're a non-xbow state. What did xbows have to do with the trends in Ohio, and why do you think we saw increased hunter participation in the 80's and a decline in the 90's? Personally, I think that deer population explosion led to the increased hunter participation. I think there are a lot of reasons that deer hunting has declined or not gotten bigger since then, but I still don't see xbows having much of an impact one way or another. 

Moreover, I thought it was interesting the leap in logic that was used to show the %'s of people that are using particular weapons. For example, he notes that the people that used xbows and bows in 2001 was 30% and 28%, respectively. However, the %'s of people that hunted with those same weapons "at least once" during a 4 yr period showed an increase to 43% (xbows) and 36% (bows). He suggests that this data shows increased participation for both weapons. 

I disagree that this is necessarily accurate. Now, his assumption may be correct, but the data doesn't prove it. Consider this hypothetical and tell me where my logic is wrong. If you polled 1000 citizens whether they hunted anything in 2001, you might get a 15% positive response rate. However, if you asked 1000 people whether they hunted anything "at least once" over four years (as opposed to just one year), your response rate might jump to 20-25%. It's kind of like me saying that I'm a pistol hunter b/c I once hunted with a pistol several years ago. 

Also, what relevance does the % of total harvest figures hold? I assume that he's trying to suggest that it demonstrates icreased hunter usage of those weapons and consequently hunter retention, but the data (again) doesn't prove it. It may be true, but then again, it may not be. He lumped bows, xbows and ML together to show an increased % of the overall deer harvest. Initially, I'd note that the ML % harvest levels increased a heckuva lot more than archery (8% to 29% for ML as opposed to 6% to 11% for archery), and he appeared to be be using ML's to justify Ohio's xbow decisions. Why have ML's increased in popularity? Two primary reasons: longer ML seasons and in-line technology made ML's more appealing, and they were consequently used by more hunters. Also, you have more deer, and, if hunters are only going to take an average of 1.4 deer a year under any circumstance, it makes sense that there'd be more deer taken with these short range weapons. 

Additionally and with respect to the % of vertical archers, the ODNR official appears to say that the xbow has not led to any decrease in the longbow's popularity. From the 1980's, the % of users went from 35% to 29% (for a long period) and suddenly, back up to 36% in 2005. Why the jump from 29% to 35%? It's obviously due to the fact that the survey question asked whether people had hunted "at least once" with a longbow over a 3 yr period. If they had asked whether the respondent used a longbow in 2004 (and no other year), I'd bet you'd see something like 27-28%. This is another example of using data out of context to make an assumption that isn't necessarily accurate. 

Finally, I saw this quote in the letter: "you would have a tough time convincing me that the crossbow is to blame for the recent decline in deer hunter numbers in Ohio." I don't believe and would never state that xbows have caused ANY decline in any overall hunter numbers. However, I do think their availability will somewhat diminish the % of vertical archers. 

I also have no problems with expanding xbow seasons tp allow for additional opportunity, and they need to be long enough to make it worthwhile to pay the money necessary to participate. I agree with his assessment that xbows offer more opportunity to more hunters. However, I believe there is a balance that should and needs to be struck between the vertical archery season and the xbow season. The xbow season in KY was probably way too short to induce anyone to buy a xbow. With the expanded season, KY will undoubtedly see a big spike in xbow users. I also believe though, that if you maintain some type of exclusive vertical archery season, you very well may induce hunters to buy both bows and xbows to participate in both seasons, rather than just one of the other.


----------



## doctariAFC

Ya know. I'd rather tie crossbow and vertical bow together... In terms of permits. Make it a pre-requisite that you hold an archery stamp to get the crossbow stamp? Proves you have completed an education course on bowhunter safety, and then over time these classes can incorporate crossbow safety as well, but you would need the one to get the other... Those who wish to choose a crossbow get to pay a little more for the priviledge, and the CF in KY will benefit accordingly.

Just a thought.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Well Ace, then tell us how allowing the xb in archery season, for choice, for expanded opportunity, for added income to the state, for the old, young and females, is any different then adding “remote” or “internet” hunting for those same reasons. Why is your added opportunity better then someone else’s added opportunity?


IF I need to explain the difference in including another archery weapon during an open archery season as it compares to your foolish ideas, then there is NO point; you'd simply not grasp the differences...... 

My opportunity (as you call it), allows those to "get out there" and actually participate in what WE all love to do.......early season archery (you know when the weather is great, the deer are easier to pattern etc.) YOUR opportunity, simply makes a "video game" out of something that is FAR superior than THAT.......hope you can actually grasp that concept


----------



## aceoky

Ballard again, I'm sorry the graphs don't show properly on here, I pasted them, they're much easier to understand in my email I recieved btw. They show in fact that while "hunter numbers" declined, deer hunter numbers did not during that time, which IS relevent, since the cb was a factor (no matter which side you're on, they were legal deer hunting weapons, yet deer hunter numbers increased while other hunter's numbers declined)....

BTW Mike didn't "pull numbers out of the sky" , he spent considerable time compiling the data he had available for me so I could post the truth, to offest the "myths"(as he called them , again in the email)....

It's a matter of fact that those opposed like to try to use Ohio to "prove" the cb does harm "verticle archery" the data does not confirm that stance however, as he tried to prove........

I have no real need to "defend" his data nor his opinions, they are his and I trust them to be accurate, he after all has the data available to use, I don't and doubt anyone else has anything "better" on which to guage the trends .....

The DATA also proves the youth involvement WAS increased and continued to increase for decades........some can maintain that had nothing to do with the cb in Ohio, most would dispute that , it was after all legal, thus a factor imho

So when some try to state there is NO data to reinforce my "women, youth, and senior hunter retention and recruitement" they're WAY "off base", there is in fact MUCH data that proves the facts......and it's NOT that hard to find either fwiw

We both seem to agree the "old 10 day season" wasn't long enough for most to buy a cb in Ky ; the real question is: 

IS this new season long enough for those who would have had the full expansion gone forward; to still buy them and use them????? Only time will tell, certainly many will buy them (they are in fact doing so now), but how many that would have , won't with this shorter season???

I wonder if this "wait and see" and "study the season we have now", is an honest reflection of what will be? No pre-rut cb hunting, is an obvious factor for some (the best time to archery hunt , ) how many that would have participated, won't with the on/off/on/off season in place??

I don't know(and doubtful anyone does or could prove it), "common sense" however dictates that a full expansion would have brought more into the season, and spread them out over many more days, which I will always likely believe to be a "win-win" for us all in Ky.........

The exact same battles were fought in Tenn. YET those who were so "concerned" , NOW state once it happened (full expansion) they were NOT effected/affected in any way, was just another archery season , they could tell NO difference in their hunting, I have heard that enough in person from Tenn hunters, and seen it posted on enought Tenn forums to believe it to be true......they also agree (and admit ) that it did NO DOUBT increase the women, youth, and seniors archery hunting.......and some even state some they know hunting with the cb , who couldn't (or wouldn't ) hunt at all (yes FR even gun hunt) prior to the full expansion.......

I'm hearing(reading) the same things from VA fwiw.......seems to be the same in GA as well..........what that tells ME is; it IS a "win-win" , for those "bold" enough to give it a chance (a real chance)....

I think what WE have now in Ky is a postive change.....and many will benefit from it......a longer expansion (especially during the pre-rut) would have only increased that with no harm to anyone else's hunting at all....

At any rate we will get some Ky data that I honestly hope WE can all use to determine the truth in KY.....


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Nice post Ace, did you bother to read this before you posted it? First let me point out that this report is not allowed in this debate, 1) because it is only the opinion of someone, no real facts to back up anything said, and 2) you didn’t post a link where this could be verified, LOL
> 
> I'll take his qualified word on this before accepting your "drivel" HE used actual DATA to state his case unlike YOU
> 
> 
> .
> 
> Or declining in this decade?? Interesting, how could this be, I thought you said it brings new people in?
> 
> Quote:
> The take home message is that licensed deer hunter numbers grew rapidly through the late 1980s, peaked in the early to mid-1990s, and have been relatively flat or declining slightly in this decade, in spite of rather significant declines in numbers of licensed hunters
> 
> Use Webster's to look up "slightly"......
> 
> 
> 
> Dropped in the last 2 seasons, YOUTHS, I thought this was specifically for youth?
> 
> We have also *seen greater participation by youth hunters *over the past 5 years. The number of youth deer hunters peaked in 2003 and has dropped slightly the past 2 seasons.
> 
> Again "slightly" which is simply amazing as more and more youths become "video game kings/queens" and spend too much time indoors for anyone's good.....MOST would be happy to see this, YOU overlook the facts and once again *try t*o "spin" them to fit your agenda........really sad when Nationwide youth hunter numbers are on rapid decline.......that's just really, really sad......shame on YOU
> 
> 
> 
> Has anyone said the xb causes decline, maybe, but it hasn’t been used much that I can remember. Nice Ace taking credit for something that doesn’t even exist
> 
> How did *I* "take credit" (or try to do so), I simply posted the email I got from the ODNR.....besides YOU have stated many times, (as source did right here in fact) the cb caused "verticle archers" to decline in huge numbers, this disproves that "myth" and misinformation......deal with the truth and the facts ........as I've tried so hard to explain (and in vain it seems) ALL the facts and DATA are on OUR side, YOU have nadda, zilch a bif fat 0.........deal with the truth , just maybe you'll actually allow yourselves to learn something useful and relevent
> 
> 
> 
> Great opinion, but any thinking person would see that over the past 25 years, there has been numerous explosive events in deer hunting, that have undoubtedly so over shadowed the xb’s supposed action in this as to make this above statement completely laughable.
> 
> No more so than the foolish claims made by YOU and YOUR side.......most know the truth there as well......fwiw
> 
> 
> 
> One can only wonder what that growth would have been without the xb
> 
> NOPE, they can easily see the DECLINE in the states that haven't allowed the cb, to "preserve traditon" (or whatever BS was used) which in fact "preserved" NOTHING......only added to the decline of archery hunters..........period
> 
> OR they could read this again "Quote:
> The percent of hunters who hunt with a compound has
> fluctuated very little and the absolute number of hunters who
> hunt with a compound has actually increased over the past
> 25 years, in spite of the crossbow’s popularity!
> 
> 
> 
> But they have, just recently. Now he gives all or most of the credit to the xb, when it looks good to do so, but doesn’t give any of the blame to it when it might just as well be.
> 
> HE has the DATA...........where is YOURS???
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmm, could it have anything to do with the advancement in compounds over that same time period? Funny how he overlooks all the other events that have occurred over the last 25 years.
> 
> HE didn't "overlook" anything, once again YOU TRY to "spin" things when YOU have nothing ........a big fat 0 once again...HE went into great detail about ALL factors, most can easily see that fact, YOU don't because once again the FACTS/DATA prove how wrong you are and have always been....
> 
> Quote:
> Up until this point, the number of licensed deer hunters
> actually increased, in spite of a loss in total hunter numbers.
> *Participation rates increased sharply *among remaining
> hunters. The *same can be said for vertical bow hunter
> numbers.*
> 
> 
> 
> Up to this point, (read they are now decreasing) could it have anything to do with deer herds growing, deer hunting being popularized, deer hunting becoming easier, deer hunting tactics changing taking some of the mystique out of deer hunting and people being not so intimidated by it and giving it a try?
> 
> Maybe it was "elf magic"???
> 
> Quote:
> For each myth there is 1 *very valid justification *for legalizing
> the crossbow in Ohio in 1976. Among those is the fact that it
> is an excellent management tool, it provides millions of
> hunter days of opportunity each year (see chart below), and
> its popularity has helped to maintain overall deer hunter
> numbers.
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing the bow doesn’t already do, the same opportunity to get out there and hunt is and has always been there, to attribute this solely to the xb, is misleading at best.


TOTAL* unfounded *misinformation, the FACT that Ohio has increased dramtically in archery hunter numbers PROVES that is FALSE! WE know why that displeases you so, it goes against YOUR agenda, proves how wrong you are and always have been, proves that MANY who won't use a compound even WILL use the cb when allowed to do so.......in other words, it PROVES exactly the opposite of what you are and have been claiming, and YOU chose to use Ohio so often to *try* to "prove" that you were "right".....NOW the facts prove you weren't...(as usual).....


MOST can look at the data, and his expert opinion of what that means, and realize at once, that the cb in Ohio has been a MAJOR PLUS for the state with NO harm to anyone or anything and be happy for that fact (and the hunters who have enjoyed using them for decades) those like YOU want to try to cast some "shadow" of the truth isn't really true........YOU can't do that, YOU guys kept bringing up OHIO as YOUR "proof", I simply asked the ODNR for the TRUTH, and got it.......one thing to claim what's true based upon Myths (if even that) , quite another one to actually get the FACTS AND DATA from the State themselves.........YOU lose! (yet again)


----------



## Jim C

Ace-all the facts in the world are irrelevant when dealing with people whose position on this issue is based on self estem and greed issues


----------



## aceoky

doctariAFC said:


> Ya know. I'd rather tie crossbow and vertical bow together... In terms of permits. Make it a pre-requisite that you hold an archery stamp to get the crossbow stamp? Proves you have completed an education course on bowhunter safety, and then over time these classes can incorporate crossbow safety as well, but you would need the one to get the other... Those who wish to choose a crossbow get to pay a little more for the priviledge, and the CF in KY will benefit accordingly.
> 
> Just a thought.


In KY we don't have a separate archery tag, you buy a deer tag (two deer only one of which can be antlered......both can be doe, IF allowed in the Zone you're hunting in and allowed during THAT particular season, for example in Zone 4 you can NOT take a doe with a modern gun, so you may "lose" that one tag,(not legally be allowed to fill it).... unless you archery hunt OR get one in the late ML season.....)... We do have "bonus antlerless tags" though, and in some Zones, those can ONLY be used for archery kills, (which makes the expansion look better in those Zones btw for them at least)...

In both Zones 3-4 the ONLY way to use the "bonus tags" (in those Zones limit is one good for two antlerless deer btw) is to use archery......since these Zones are also the lowest income level Zones (on average) it's very easy to see why some extra meat is a blessing for these hunters.......

IF they can archery hunt......the expansion makes it more possible for many of these hunters many who work two full-time jobs(at least) just to get by(many of the jobs are min wage in these areas,) they take what they can get.......iow


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> Ace-all the facts in the world are irrelevant when dealing with people whose position on this issue is based on self estem and greed issues


That's very true JimC, but at least next time someone tries to use YOUR state as their "proof" one can come back here and re-post the email from the ODNR and prove it for the "spin" that it is! :cocktail:

BTW those very myths that were just "debunked" WERE used against the Ky full expansion.......fwiw IF the "right people" get ahold of this information, they just might look at those who told them otherwise in a "different light".....hmmm something to consider on my part......


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> In KY we don't have a separate archery tag, you buy a deer tag (two deer only one of which can be antlered......both can be doe, IF allowed in the Zone you're hunting in and allowed during THAT particular season, for example in Zone 4 you can NOT take a doe with a modern gun, so you may "lose" that one tag,(not legally be allowed to fill it).... unless you archery hunt OR get one in the late ML season.....)... We do have "bonus antlerless tags" though, and in some Zones, those can ONLY be used for archery kills, (which makes the expansion look better in those Zones btw for them at least)...
> 
> In both Zones 3-4 the ONLY way to use the "bonus tags" (in those Zones limit is one good for two antlerless deer btw) is to use archery......since these Zones are also the lowest income level Zones (on average) it's very easy to see why some extra meat is a blessing for these hunters.......
> 
> 
> IF they can archery hunt......the expansion makes it more possible for many of these hunters many who work two full-time jobs(at least) just to get by(many of the jobs are min wage in these areas,) they take what they can get.......iow


 Ace , Tell all these fine people why there are zone 3-4 counties


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> That's very true JimC, but at least next time someone tries to use YOUR state as their "proof" one can come back here and re-post the email from the ODNR and prove it for the "spin" that it is! :cocktail:


 Duh Ace you know Ohio is not a good state to compare to Ky. They use shotguns outside of the rut. Those southern states you mention dont hold a candle to Ky as far as B&C bucks. Now they are severly over populated with tiny deer so yes they do need all the help they can get.


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> Ace , Tell all these fine people why there are zone 3-4 counties


Because they're NOT Zones 1-2........ 

Has NOTHING to do with this (not relevent) what IS relevent is these hunters in these Zones want to expand so they can archery hunt without the "fear" of not being "good enough" with another type of bow......they would have been allowed to do so, had "some" not interferred with the process........

JUST because they're NOT to the level of exceeding "social carrying capacity" doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to kill doe, in fact the Dept was nearly begging for more doe to be taken in Zone 4 (which is why they're NOW allowed doe in late ML season fwiw).......

Fact IS; most opposed to expansion are in a Zone 1-2 and don't care about these other hunters nor their "problems"......I've been around them for a very long time, and have done what I could for THEM........I plan to continue to do the same in the future...... fwiw

They wanted more opportunity, some didn't want them to have it, well, they got some.........despite that, and bet on MORE archery hunters now in Zones 3-4..........that's a "good thing" for them, their families(especially those who kill a doe)......for everyone.........AND it will have NO impact on those in Zones 1-2........it simply can not have......

More "blather" ,much ado about nothing.........


----------



## aceoky

KY MUSTANG said:


> Duh Ace you know Ohio is not a good state to compare to Ky. They use shotguns outside of the rut.
> 
> Those southern states you mention dont hold a candle to Ky as far as B&C bucks. Now they are severly over populated with tiny deer so yes they do need all the help they can get.


DUH, it wasn't ME who tried to use Ohio, they did (source and FR both have done so, as did Jim Strader among *many others in KY *opposed to expansion).......sorry THEY lose!

I don't care when the gun season in Ohio is, THAT is not even an issue in regards to this.......ONE has nothing to do with the other, gun hunting is NOT archery hunting, they're seperate entities and not related as such......


The false claim has been made all too often "Look at Ohio, the cb has destroyed verticle archery there"..........FALSE........and I've proven it false, with the help of the ODNR..:cocktail:

YOU may also want to re-check Tenn. they are coming a LONG way towards having "good deer" to hunt, they've been following (guess who's example) for some time.......and have made vast improvements in thier deer, which I'd suspect will only continue......I'd also guess the full cb expansion will aid them in this .......another "win-win" situation from the cb expansion....


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> Because they're NOT Zones 1-2........
> 
> Has NOTHING to do with this (not relevent) what IS relevent is these hunters in these Zones want to expand so they can archery hunt without the "fear" of not being "good enough" with another type of bow......they would have been allowed to do so, had "some" not interferred with the process........
> 
> JUST because they're NOT to the level of exceeding "social carrying capacity" doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to kill doe, in fact the Dept was nearly begging for more doe to be taken in Zone 4 (which is why they're NOW allowed doe in late ML season fwiw).......
> 
> Fact IS; most opposed to expansion are in a Zone 1-2 and don't care about these other hunters nor their "problems"......I've been around them for a very long time, and have done what I could for THEM........I plan to continue to do the same in the future...... fwiw
> 
> They wanted more opportunity, some didn't want them to have it, well, they got some.........despite that, and bet on MORE archery hunters now in Zones 3-4..........that's a "good thing" for them, their families(especially those who kill a doe)......for everyone.........AND it will have NO impact on those in Zones 1-2........it simply can not have......
> 
> More "blather" ,much ado about nothing.........


 Ace them killing deer when they get ready is probably the reason they are zone 3 -4. Those people do what they have to to survive.:wink:


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> DUH, it wasn't ME who tried to use Ohio, they did (source and FR both have done so, as did Jim Strader among *many others in KY *opposed to expansion).......sorry THEY lose!
> 
> I don't care when the gun season in Ohio is, THAT is not even an issue in regards to this.......ONE has nothing to do with the other, gun hunting is NOT archery hunting, they're seperate entities and not related as such......
> 
> 
> The false claim has been made all too often "Look at Ohio, the cb has destroyed verticle archery there"..........FALSE........and I've proven it false, with the help of the ODNR..:cocktail:
> I thought you would bite lol. Why are they falling behind Ky on B&C bucks then with the advantage of not only shotgun only, but outside the rut.Lets see........ what other states are like that, without a certain weapon ,Kansas, Iowa , Ohio's close neighbor Illinois. I think the reason is easy to see.
> 
> YOU may also want to re-check Tenn. they are coming a LONG way towards having "good deer" to hunt, they've been following (guess who's example) for some time.......and have made vast improvements in thier deer, which I'd suspect will only continue......I'd also guess the full cb expansion will aid them in this .......another "win-win" situation from the cb expansion....


 Tennessee's biggest deer are primarily in LBL, I travel all over Tennessee going to drag race . The only deer I have seen are tiny over populated runts. My friends and family from Tenneessee will tell you the same thing. Thats why they come to Ky to hunt:wink:


----------



## aceoky

Sure "I'll bite"......no good reason not to your "opinions" are only that.....opinions......


Ky Mustang, first B&C bucks(or any "book" ) does NOT prove anything, some won't enter the world record.......didn't you know that?

But since YOU brought up that ......compare Ohio to Ky in P&Y bucks, and where is the world record cb buck killed.......which state???

Add to that, Ohio just increased BOTH their gun and archery seasons........that bs won't "cut it", Ohio is doing very well indeed in regards to deer, and big ones also.......funny how you only want what you imply to matter ( I remember not so long ago, YOU were given the Ohio P&Y figures right here on this very thread........short memory, OR just using what benefits YOUR agenda?).... 

As for Tenn. my late father was from there, I hunt there, quite often have much family there (one cousin has over 800 acres I hunt, whenever it's season and I wish to do so........that's just ONE place btw).......and I KNOW the deer herd IS improving there.....I never said it was to our level YET, only it was "heading that way", and beleive me it is.........may never make it, who knows, (they don't have the terrain we do nor the agriculture which will limit things at least somewhat NO doubt)..but compared to a decade ago, Tenn. is NOT the same place as far as deer and turkey go.......period


----------



## Free Range

> IF I need to explain the difference in including another archery weapon during an open archery season as it compares to your foolish ideas, then there is NO point; you'd simply not grasp the differences......


Oh I see the difference, but do you, here’s a hint.
Hypocrisy, hy-poc-ri-sy [hi pokressee] 
1.(and I love this first one) Feigned high principles
A false cliam to or pretense of having abmirable principles, beliefs, or feelings.

I guess more opportunity is only a good thing when it falls under your definition or hunting. See above for definition of a stance like this. 




> I have no real need to "defend" his data nor his opinions, they are his and I trust them to be accurate, he after all has the data available to use, I don't and doubt anyone else has anything "better" on which to guage the trends .....


Well unless he is hiding something we all have it too. And within minutes of you posting it, or of two people reading it, it is shown to be full of holes. 
Remember Ace, oh purveyor of facts, under your rules no opinions are allowed. 



> The DATA also proves the youth involvement WAS increased and continued to increase for decades........some can maintain that had nothing to do with the cb in Ohio, most would dispute that , it was after all legal, thus a factor imho


Then one can only deduce it is the xb’s fault youth are now in decline. 



> We both seem to agree the "old 10 day season" wasn't long enough for most to buy a cb in Ky ; the real question is:
> 
> IS this new season long enough for those who would have had the full expansion gone forward; to still buy them and use them????? Only time will tell, certainly many will buy them (they are in fact doing so now), but how many that would have , won't with this shorter season???


IF, the xb provides such opportunity, and there IS such a grass roots movement to include them, then why would any season be to short? Isn’t hunting 20 days better then no days? Kind of makes a guy think there are other reasons why people use xb’s



> who couldn't (or wouldn't ) hunt at all (yes FR even gun hunt) prior to the full expansion.......


Wouldn’t is more accurate. They all had the same opportunity before full expansion. And one year does not make for very convincing data, or opinions. And again, a hand full of respondents here and there is nothing to hang your hat on. 



> I'll take his qualified word on this before accepting your "drivel" HE used actual DATA to state his case unlike YOU


Hey that is your rule not mine, so are you changing your mind AGAIN and now accepting opinion? 



> Again "slightly" which is simply amazing as more and more youths become "video game kings/queens" and spend too much time indoors for anyone's good.....MOST would be happy to see this,


Most would be happy to see a decline? Well not me, maybe you, but no sir not me, I’m happy with increase. Are you saying it makes you happy to have less hunters in “your” woods? 



> How did *I* "take credit" (or try to do so), I simply posted the email I got from the ODNR.....besides





> Imagine THAT!


With this little quote you took credit for pointing out something that didn’t even exist. 



> No more so than the foolish claims made by YOU and YOUR side.......most know the truth there as well......fwiw


I like how you skipped that one? 




> NOPE, they can easily see the DECLINE in the states that haven't allowed the cb, to "preserve traditon" (or whatever BS was used) which in fact "preserved" NOTHING......only added to the decline of archery hunters..........period


As Ballard has said, the growth in Ohio is pretty much mirrored in other eastern states without the xb. Please use facts, and stop just saying the first thing that comes to mind. 



> HE has the DATA...........where is YOURS???


He has no data, he said this happened, he said this occurred, and he made the leap that one caused the other. But the funny thing is, when a negative happens, in the same but opposite way he ignores that, as not being related. 



> HE went into great detail about ALL factors,


Gee Ace, you are getting way off now. He didn’t talk about the advancements in compounds, or the growth of tree stand use, or pop-up blinds, or carbon arrows, or scents, or calls, or the explosion of information, in magazines, books and TV shows about deer hunting, he didn’t talk about the growth of the deer herd as a contributing factor. And on and on and on. Are you really this blind?


----------



## Free Range

> Ky Mustang, first B&C bucks(or any "book" ) does NOT prove anything, some won't enter the world record.......didn't you know that?


Slow down Ace, you have said at least a quadzillion times, the B&C bucks coming out of Ohio prove the xb’s worth. Now it’s not so? Filp Flop, Flip Flop, Flip Flop. 



> But since YOU brought up that ......compare Ohio to Ky in P&Y bucks, and where is the world record cb buck killed.......which state???


A state that has how many thousand xb users, compaired to KY, and you think this proves anything?



> one cousin has over 800 acres I hunt, whenever it's season and I wish to do so........that's just ONE place btw



Poor little rich kid, try hunting public land sometime.


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Oh I see the difference, but do you, here’s a hint.
> Hypocrisy, hy-poc-ri-sy [hi pokressee]
> 1.(and I love this first one) Feigned high principles
> A false cliam to or pretense of having abmirable principles, beliefs, or feelings.
> 
> I agree that most can see that defines you in an instant...
> 
> I guess more opportunity is only a good thing when it falls under your definition or hunting. See above for definition of a stance like this.
> 
> We ARE talking about archery hunting here.....you are most certainly "full of yourself today" (among other things)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well unless he is hiding something we all have it too. And within minutes of you posting it, or of two people reading it, it is shown to be full of holes.
> Remember Ace, oh purveyor of facts, under your rules no opinions are allowed.
> 
> NOT even close to being full of holes.....it certainly disproves YOUR stnaces (all of them btw)
> 
> 
> 
> Then one can only deduce it is the xb’s fault youth are now in decline.
> 
> Yep , that must be it, no blame on the single parent home, the advance in computers and gaming (not to mention they cost much less than before), NO one willing to take them, it must be the cb fault
> 
> Your foolish and absurd claims in the face of facts and data (btw from the state YOU chose to "prove" YOU were "so right" no less only serves to show everyone how "far" you're willing to go to keep other archery hunters out of the woods and away from YOUR deer (even in other states, since you have called it a "cancer" spreading from state to state and WILL soemday affect YOU........it' s NOT all about YOU.......there are many, many more hunters than you......and your ilk... time to face up to that fact......they want this, just as the compound hunters did 30 years ago.......same thing different decade........
> 
> 
> 
> IF, the xb provides such opportunity, and there IS such a grass roots movement to include them, then why would any season be to short? Isn’t hunting 20 days better then no days? Kind of makes a guy think there are other reasons why people use xb’s
> 
> Fine then YOU lobby to change the archery season in Co to 10 days, PLEASE let us ALL know how that's going for you.......
> 
> One can easily see where that is coming from(and you), SO long as it doesn't affect YOU or YOUR season, 2 days is "plenty" and better than nothing.........selfish, pure and simple
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn’t is more accurate. They all had the same opportunity before full expansion. And one year does not make for very convincing data, or opinions. And again, a hand full of respondents here and there is nothing to hang your hat on.
> 
> Yet it's MUCH more than YOU have .......
> 
> 
> 
> Hey that is your rule not mine, so are you changing your mind AGAIN and now accepting opinion?
> 
> EXPERT opinion, from the state YOU chose(among others who keep using Ohio as well) using REAL HARD DATA, is NOT simply an opinion, YOU don't make the "cut" on expert opinion, IF that's "above your understanding" you are in very short supply of "company" therein..
> 
> 
> 
> Most would be happy to see a decline? Well not me, maybe you, but no sir not me, I’m happy with increase. Are you saying it makes you happy to have less hunters in “your” woods?
> 
> YOU keep saying MORE hunters may not be better, NOW which is it??? More misinformation, and "playing with the truth" by YOU......anyone can easily go back and read where YOU said that many times in this thread alone
> 
> 
> 
> With this little quote you took credit for pointing out something that didn’t even exist.
> 
> Huge stretch, but nothing unusual for YOU
> 
> 
> As Ballard has said, the growth in Ohio is pretty much mirrored in other eastern states without the xb. Please use facts, and stop just saying the first thing that comes to mind.
> 
> His opinion, I don't agree , as many do not......plus he was incorrect on the number of deer hunter decline numbers.....great choice there......
> 
> 
> 
> He has no data, he said this happened, he said this occurred, and he made the leap that one caused the other. But the funny thing is, when a negative happens, in the same but opposite way he ignores that, as not being related.
> 
> Current estimates are based on an analysis of both license and *permit sales data*, as well as surveys. YOU said he had NONE, again more "spin" and misinformation.........proven
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gee Ace, you are getting way off now. He didn’t talk about the advancements in compounds, or the growth of tree stand use, or pop-up blinds, or carbon arrows, or scents, or calls, or the explosion of information, in magazines, books and TV shows about deer hunting, he didn’t talk about the growth of the deer herd as a contributing factor. And on and on and on. Are you really this blind?



"There is no question that bow hunting continues to see the greatest growth among all implement types" (that being with the LONG cb season )


Why should he need to do that? He was answering question I asked about deer hunting from a DEER HUNTER.......MOST deer hunters (as well as himself) are very much aware of all of that, "odd" thing is IN many states still deer hunter numbers are on rapid decline; NOT in Ohio, what one major difference is there between those on rapid decline and Ohio..........the LONG CB season.............simple really.........

Sorry it doesn't fit your agenda, and the FACTS/DATA prove how incorrect YOU are and always have been........too bad for YOU.....:cocktail: 

YOU asked ME for the proof, I had pretty much decided to drop out of this and not post it, Ohio however kept coming up with unfounded myths and downright falsehoods, thus compelling me to disprove them all, thanks to the ODNR and Mike, I've done that and more........I know it upsets you to be wrong yet again......but when you pick the side with NO facts or data to support your stance, that IS what happens........live and learn.......IF you can and will........:tongue:


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> Slow down Ace, you have said at least a quadzillion times, the B&C bucks coming out of Ohio prove the xb’s worth. Now it’s not so? Filp Flop, Flip Flop, Flip Flop.
> 
> YOU wish......I've said BOOK BUCKS and they must be there before they can be killed and entered.......didn't you know or realize that fact?? YOU have the nerve to talk about flip-flops, after what everyone has seen YOU do right here, asking stupid questions I refused to answer then YOU coming back and posting a response that I never even posted......typical........HERE is an "idea" for YOU FR, how about YOU posting up some relevent data rather than sitting around making feeble attempts to dispute real facts and data........I've only asked even more times than I've mentioned book bucks in Ohio.........I'm still waiting though......while you try to "prove" facts and data wrong (in vain) YOU have nothing of your own......typical, sad, and a losing tactic......everyone can see that sad fact..
> 
> 
> 
> A state that has how many thousand xb users, compaired to KY, and you think this proves anything?
> 
> Oh now it's a "good thing"?? FLip Flop....YEP it proves EVEN with those thousands of cb hunters they are still killing the "big boys" NO way to dispute that fact, EVEN after decades of the cb being legal during the entire archery season, it proves YOU are wrong, wrong and wrong yet again...........I'd call that a bit more than "anything"
> 
> ONE more point P&Y does NOT admit cb kills into "their book"......once again NO point made
> 
> SO to "simplify" it for you; even with decades of cb use, Ohio is still very "high" on the P&Y book list,which proves the cb has NOT "ruined archery" in Ohio....and since they don't allow cb kills into their book, those were killed with other bows they do allow, really hard to even try to state that the cb "ruined archery hunting in Ohio" knowing the fact; yet YOU and a few more still continue to do just that.......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poor little rich kid, try hunting public land sometime.


I hunt public land, just because I don't HAVE to all of the time is not relevent, has nothing to do with any of this, MOST public land gets the most pressure during gun season anyway, NOT what is being discussed.....one would hope by now YOU could follow the topic at hand, one would be almost as wrong as you've been on this whole matter from day one (and still haven't learned).......


----------



## Free Range

> We ARE talking about archery hunting here.....you are most certainly "full of yourself today" (among other things)


1)SO, does other forms of hunting deserve less opportunity?
2)And you could rig up a bow to shoot from one of these things, or even easier a xb



> Yep , that must be it, no blame on the single parent home, the advance in computers and gaming (not to mention they cost much less than before), NO one willing to take them, it must be the cb fault


Too funny, when things “LOOK” good, it’s because the xb, made it so, but when things don’t look so good it’s all these other things,,,, what was that word, hypocrisy.




> Fine then YOU lobby to change the archery season in Co to 10 days, PLEASE let us ALL know how that's going for you.......
> 
> One can easily see where that is coming from(and you), SO long as it doesn't affect YOU or YOUR season, 2 days is "plenty" and better than nothing.........selfish, pure and simple


Again you are to,,,, dense to see the point, the point is with one day allowed, bowhunters would still be bow hunting, why is it not the same with xb”s? If it’s such a great deal and there is all these people just dying for the chance to HIT the woods during bow season but they are being so deprived, why isn’t three weeks enough to offer opportunity? 



> EXPERT opinion, from the state YOU chose(among others who keep using Ohio as well) using REAL HARD DATA, is NOT simply an opinion, YOU don't make the "cut" on expert opinion, IF that's "above your understanding" you are in very short supply of "company" therein..


I’ve seen “expert” opinion that said Hitler was misunderstood and he really was good, LOL. It’s not hard to see this expert opinion is making some strange leaps of connection, as pointed out by Ballard. And opinion is opinion, yours mine and his, either opinion is allowed or it’s not. And as for his hard data, what study of youths did he site, what study of elderly did he site, what study of anything did he site? None, he listed numbers of hunters then made an assumption as to what they mean, and contradicted his own stance a time or two, now that is some good expert opinion to hang with.



> YOU keep saying MORE hunters may not be better, NOW which is it??? More misinformation, and "playing with the truth" by YOU......anyone can easily go back and read where YOU said that many times in this thread alone


No, you are lying again, I asked why more hunters in archery season is a good thing. I never said more “hunters” may not be good. And you are always saying more hunters, is good and more bowhunters is good, now you are happy with a decline? I ask you which is it Ace? 



> His opinion, I don't agree , as many do not......plus he was incorrect on the number of deer hunter decline numbers.....great choice there......



Agree or not, your “expert” from Ohio said it himself, hunter numbers are in decline, and deer hunter numbers are in decline. So who are you going to believe me, Ballard or your expert? Oh wait we all said the same thing. You a funny man. 



> YOU asked ME for the proof, I had pretty much decided to drop out of this and not post it, Ohio however kept coming up with unfounded myths and downright falsehoods, thus compelling me to disprove them all, thanks to the ODNR and Mike, I've done that and more........I know it upsets you to be wrong yet again......but when you pick the side with NO facts or data to support your stance, that IS what happens........live and learn.......IF you can and will........


Can I have some of what you are on? It’s odvious you are in a dream world, you have proved nothing but that you have a pro xb guy making undocumented claims that one occurrence caused another, nothing but theory on his part and not very strong at that.


----------



## aceoky

FR I can't believe anyone is as dense as you're are now appearing to be, so unless you actually are, then you're either trying to "yank my chain", or so "into your own little dream world" as to not be able to understand anything, either way.........

YOU are simply wasting my time, YOU feel free to believe yourself over a wildlife biologist from the ODNR(on Ohio trends no less).........

YOUR choice, YOUR loss....I don't care what YOU believe, the facts speak for themselves (and contrary to your bs do not contradict themseves at any point)....... YOU have nothing(as usual) but feeble attempts to dispute hard data and facts with your "spin"........typical, btw I'm still waiting for YOU to post up some actually relevent facts to try to support YOUR position........unless you do, please don't waste any more of our time with your misinformation and "spin"........

I'm of the opinion YOU can't because none exists, after waiting for over a year and a half for it, you've had more than ample time, so while you may make yoruself feel better by *trying * to dispute facts/data(in vain again), you're in no way helping your agenda nor your cause, .........thanks for showing everyone what YOU and yours are really "all about"......what YOU want, at the expense of other hunters no less.........with nothing to even try to back up your false claims.........it's great that you "think" that your feeble attempts to discredit the real facts/data and truth, are in fact getting you somewhere, most can see through such tactics rather quickly.....

YOU have yet to provide ONE bit of actual, factual evidence to support any of your false claims......."run down" all of my data, as much as you can, without any of your own posted, it's silly , foolish, and shows your true character(or lack of)...........

Let's see to date (to only name a couple) YOU have *"tried*" to "run down" data from the Senior Wildlife Bilogist from GA, NOW the Wildlife Bilogist from Ohio,YET YOU have provided nothing of substance at all........WOW!!!

YOU certainly must think very highly of yourself and YOUR opinion, to even attempt to get anyone to accept your opinions over theirs (and about their respective states no less)..........

Yeah, you're looking "real good" right now.......


----------



## thesource

Free Range said:


> So who are you going to believe me, Ballard or your expert? Oh wait we all said the same thing. You a funny man.





Aceoky said:


> YOU feel free to believe yourself over a wildlife biologist from the ODNR(on Ohio trends no less).........



LOL - Free Range, you HAD to see that coming.

Ace believes his interpretation of what the Author might have meant is "FACT", remember?:wink: 

There are gaps aplenty to explore here Ace.

Let's have some good old fashioned fun with your data .... actually, we'll just poke fun at your interpretation of the data...LOL.:darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

Whatever source........


----------



## Jim C

why does Source and Free Range spend so much time arguing ancillary nonsense when we all know what really motivates this opposition?


----------



## aceoky

YET MORE foolish nonsense spewing forth from source (anyone surprised?)

The facts are they were on the* increase for decades, *while other states were in serious decline........I'm betting a 10 yr old can see that.... 

Also since YOU stated cb "ruined archery in Ohio", perhaps YOU have an answer how they score so "high" in P&Y bucks??????

btw, whatever source......


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> why does Source and Free Range spend so much time arguing ancillary nonsense when we all know what really motivates this opposition?


They "hope" a few others will "fall for it " and "join them" in thier foolishness????


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Also since YOU stated cb "ruined archery in Ohio", perhaps YOU have an answer how they score so "high" in P&Y bucks??????



Please show us where I said exactly that.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Trends in Licensed Deer Hunter and Hunter Numbers…
> As you can see from the figure below, both are declining......


OK, that means deer hunter numbers are declining - uh oh. Looks like crossbows don't help as much as you say they do. 



aceoky said:


> In spite of this trend, the number of licensed deer hunters gradually increased through at least 2003.


Oh! Never mind, your "expert" contradicted himself. Deer hunters are increasing. Guess you were right and crossbows are helpful after all. 



aceoky said:


> They now appear to be on the decline or at the very best, holding steady since 2003.


:doh: looks like you were wrong after all (and your expert misled us). Ohio is declining in spite of your savior the crossbow.




aceoky said:


> 1) deer hunting participation has probably peaked
> 
> 2) We should probably plan on a gradual erosion of our hunter base.



Pssst.:gossip: That means declining (again). Crossbows are not saving us. 



aceoky said:


> The take home message is that licensed deer hunter numbers grew rapidly through the late 1980s, peaked in the early to mid-1990s, and have been relatively flat or declining slightly in this decade.


 That's a bunch in a row! Oh deer hunter numbers are DROPPING. Can't be because Ace says crossbows will boost participation, yet it must be true because his expert said it is! 



aceoky said:


> Deer hunter numbers expanded through the late 1980s, peaked somewhere in the latter part of the last decade or early in the current decade and have been stable or declining slightly since then.



Again. Over and over, declining, declining. This just can't be true because when Ballard said:



Ballard said:


> The Nat'l Wildlife Group (which is not anti-hunting) reported that Ohio's deer hunters had declined more than 20% from 1991-2001.


Ace said:



aceoky said:


> Again bad information at best.....at any rate also disproven from the OHIO DNR


Even though, as the man from ODNR has said over and over and over, deer hunters are declining, have peaked, etc.

ACE - You are contrradicting your own star witness!!!!!! 

Looks like Ballard wins after all.



In my next chapter, we'll get to the good stuff.

Has crossbow negatively impacted bowhunter growth in OH?

This is, after all, what the claim was. It never was that the number of bowhunters declined, which is what Ace claims it to be. It would be helpful if he could stay on track, but it is not required.

My next segment will use Ace's expert's own testimony to prove how crossbows have negatively effected bowhunting in OH.

Stay tuned.


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> Sure "I'll bite"......no good reason not to your "opinions" are only that.....opinions......
> 
> 
> Ky Mustang, first B&C bucks(or any "book" ) does NOT prove anything, some won't enter the world record.......didn't you know that?
> I for one am concerned about Ky's big buck resource. I know you are not.
> 
> But since YOU brought up that ......compare Ohio to Ky in P&Y bucks, and where is the world record cb buck killed.......which state???
> post up some proof over the last 10 years ,Ace, prove Ohio is ahead:wink: ,
> 
> Add to that, Ohio just increased BOTH their gun and archery seasons........that bs won't "cut it", Ohio is doing very well indeed in regards to deer, and big ones also.......funny how you only want what you imply to matter ( I remember not so long ago, YOU were given the Ohio P&Y figures right here on this very thread........short memory, OR just using what benefits YOUR agenda?).... That was someone one trying to spin my post around,I never made that statement and you know it dumbass,Most will enter their buck in B&C if it meets the minium, you do know it is higher than p&y don't you Ace. I wonder how many bucks are shot in Ohio with x bows and claimed to be bow kills :wink:
> 
> As for Tenn. my late father was from there, I hunt there, quite often have much family there (one cousin has over 800 acres I hunt, whenever it's season and I wish to do so........that's just ONE place btw).......and I KNOW the deer herd IS improving there.....I never said it was to our level YET, only it was "heading that way", and beleive me it is.........may never make it, who knows, (they don't have the terrain we do nor the agriculture which will limit things at least somewhat NO doubt)..but compared to a decade ago, Tenn. is NOT the same place as far as deer and turkey go.......period


 The terrrain on the western end of Tennesse all the way to Memphis is very much like west Ky , the deer are severly over populated it is nothing to see 20 deer standing in 1 field and the samething 1/2 mile down the road.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> *Crossbows do hurt bowhunting, as withnessed in OH *where crossbow hunters outnumber bowhunters by3:2 (and growing)
> 
> *while new bowhunter recruitment lags far behind the national average. *
> 
> Proven to be FALSE by the ODNR
> 
> 
> * I think that is bad for bowhunting.*
> 
> anyone surprised???
> 
> .
> 
> 
> I won't argue with the fact that selling crossbow permits adds to Conservation Funds....but it does not require a bowseasaon takeover to do that, and it is not fair to throw bowhunting under the bus just to boost your beloved Conservation Fund.
> 
> "Bowhunting" isn't being "thrown anywhere", NOT one bowhunter is affected/effected in any way, they choose to use a cb or NOT to .........they can still use whatever bow they wish or choose, they do however get one more choice of bow to use.....
> 
> In closing, there are legitimate facts on both sides. Just because you refuse to accept them does not mean they are not factual.
> 
> 
> The OH crossbow/bowhunter numbers are a fact, for example,
> 
> NOT exactly "facts" as YOU stated them, the ODNR's numbers don't match yours even close, most will take their numbers over yours...
> 
> 
> You refuse to admit they are facts, however, and keep buffaloing your own opinions.
> .


*There* YOU go source, in that one, YOU don't say "ruin" as you have in the past, however the "gist" of the matter remains constant ......


----------



## Jim C

source, the issue is not speculating as to what Ohio's numbers would be or wouldn't be. its a fact that thousands of people CHOOSE to use a crossbow in the four month season and you have yet to give us a logical reason why your psychological issues should trump the choice and desires of thousands


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> *There* YOU go source, in that one, YOU don't say "ruin" as you have in the past, however the "gist" of the matter remains constant ......



No, no. cheater.

Either find where I said "ruin", or shut your big pie hole.:zip: 

I said "hurt", and when I get the time, I will use your "expert's" own numbers to prove it has hurt (which is what I claimed to begin with) bowhunting's growth in OH, and possibly further discredit your star witness while I'm at it. 

Should be entertaining .... make sure you check back later....LOL


----------



## aceoky

Mustang YOU said B&C, THEY showed YOU the P&Y figures(now you're asking for more proof of the same......).......I'm aware of that, however YOU should now KNOW that Ohio is "high" on the P&Y list of states.......

Unless you have proof of many P&Y bucks being cb killed and claimed as P&Y, you have "squat" as usual, besides the FACT remains, even after decades of legal cb use during the archery season they're at the top of the "list" of states in P&Y bucks, NO one can dispute that with facts........

thus it's proven yet again those opposed and their "ideas" are NOT based upon ANY DATA/FACTS........simply undereducated opinions and "feelings".


----------



## aceoky

I'll say this r-e-a-l slow so you can grasp the concept source, I do not care what you try to prove......or if you "think" you can discredit the ODNR or thier bilogist, YOU have been proven wrong yet again......(as well as FR)

I have decided you're 100% without hope in even knowing facts when faced with them source (as doctariAFC has more than proven to all)......(add to THAT Jim C doing much of the same many, many times as well)

I have NO intention of wasting any more time on you or FR.......enjoy your "spin" as useless as it is.........


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> No, no. cheater.
> 
> Either find where I said "ruin", or shut your big pie hole.:zip:
> 
> I said "hurt", and when I get the time, I will use your "expert's" own numbers to prove it has hurt (which is what I claimed to begin with) bowhunting's growth in OH, and possibly further discredit your star witness while I'm at it.
> 
> Should be entertaining .... make sure you check back later....LOL


NO 

YOU have said it, RUINED OHIO BOWHUNTING.. and more than once, most here have read it, it's not worth my time to prove a well known fact........anyone who wishes to go through the many pages of "source quotes", can find it for themselves, I don't care........and yet I have no doubts you've stated it and often......IF that's not good enough for you ........too bad

YOU source, are in a dream world of your own, of which NO rational person can even begin to imagine........enjoy your stay there.......


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> Mustang YOU said B&C, THEY showed YOU the P&Y figures(now you're asking for more proof of the same......).......I'm aware of that, however YOU should now KNOW that Ohio is "high" on the P&Y list of states.......
> 
> Unless you have proof of many P&Y bucks being cb killed and claimed as P&Y, you have "squat" as usual, besides the FACT remains, even after decades of legal cb use during the archery season they're at the top of the "list" of states in P&Y bucks, NO one can dispute that with facts........
> 
> thus it's proven yet again those opposed and their "ideas" are NOT based upon ANY DATA/FACTS........simply undereducated opinions and "feelings".


 Yet you know it would be very easy to do.:wink: . I do not believe the info that was posted I need a link to verify as you would :wink: . I think you did agree with someone that it was not uncommon to see a 140" deer in Ky, correct.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> No, no. cheater.
> 
> Either find where I said "ruin", or shut your big pie hole.:zip:
> 
> I said "hurt", and when I get the time, I will use your "expert's" own numbers to prove it has hurt (which is what I claimed to begin with) bowhunting's growth in OH, and possibly further discredit your star witness while I'm at it.
> 
> Should be entertaining .... make sure you check back later....LOL



what are you blathering about Source? You have already conceded that crossbow legalization has had ZERO deleterious affect upon hunting or the deer herd. In other words all you are left with is arguing things are worse when 100 guys buy crossbows rather than compound bows which is =of course-a subjective and pathetic argument


----------



## Free Range

:darkbeer: :cocktail: :RockOn: :banana: :banana: :wave: :wave: :wave: :violin: :violin: :lalala: :amen: 

In other words Source, he can't stand to see his star witness used against him so he is gong to take his toy and go home. See ya.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> :darkbeer: :cocktail: :RockOn: :banana: :banana: :wave: :wave: :wave: :violin: :violin: :lalala: :amen:
> 
> In other words Source, he can't stand to see his star witness used against him so he is gong to take his toy and go home. See ya.



what are you blathering about Free Range? right is right, wrong is wrong and your psychological and esteem issues are what motivates this nonsense


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> I'll say this r-e-a-l slow so you can grasp the concept source, I do not care what you try to prove......or if you "think" you can discredit the ODNR or thier bilogist, YOU have been proven wrong yet again......(as well as FR)
> .....


I said "possibly discredit" ... we'll see how the math turns out.

I do not have to think anything. His math will either be verifiable or it will not - that is the beauty of math. There is only one answer, and it could care less what your personal opinion is. 

As I said - we'll see how it turns out.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> NO
> 
> YOU have said it, RUINED OHIO BOWHUNTING.. and more than once, most here have read it, it's not worth my time to prove a well known fact.........


Well then its not worth MY time to listen to you spew false allegations, slanderer.

PROVE it or SHUT it.

Otherwise, I have just proven you are a LIAR......lol.


----------



## JavaMan

I've read it myself but another choice in a sport doesn't hurt.

this is funny to watch.

Source is over his head displaying his ignorance and he can't even see it. 

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Well then its not worth MY time to listen to you spew false allegations, slanderer.
> 
> PROVE it or SHUT it.
> 
> Otherwise, I have just proven you are a LIAR......lol.


I have told you before Source-you have neither the standing nor the credibility to tell anyone to shut up. You are basically posting dishonest nonsense because all of this crap a facade for your real motivation which has nothing to do with deer numbers, hunter numbers etc


----------



## ballard

God, how I love a good free for all!!!!! 

The big "L" word is flying over here 10 times as much as it ever has on Kyhunting. . . . .Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!!!!

Have y'all happened to notice that there's only about 10 people that even bother to check this thread out?

I'm not sure whether my fascination with this thread is due to my lack of desire to actually work or if I'm simply enjoying being a rubbernecker watching a train wreck in progress. 

Lol. You guys have a good weekend and remember that at the end of the day, each one of us looks forward to being in the woods and chasing deer. I'd even venture to say that probably none of us are nearly as obnoxious in real life as we come across on these frickin' websites.


----------



## doctariAFC

ballard said:


> God, how I love a good free for all!!!!!
> 
> The big "L" word is flying over here 10 times as much as it ever has on Kyhunting. . . . .Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!!!!
> 
> Have y'all happened to notice that there's only about 10 people that even bother to check this thread out?
> 
> I'm not sure whether my fascination with this thread is due to my lack of desire to actually work or if I'm simply enjoying being a rubbernecker watching a train wreck in progress.
> 
> Lol. You guys have a good weekend and remember that at the end of the day, each one of us looks forward to being in the woods and chasing deer. I'd even venture to say that probably none of us are nearly as obnoxious in real life as we come across on these frickin' websites.


Hey you have a great weekend too. Get and and do some fishing, if you can....

And the beat goes on!


----------



## KY MUSTANG

If it was not so darn hot, we could just find us a place and square off lol. Have a good weekend. Everyone but jim c anyway


----------



## aceoky

Sorry Mustang, I'm not going to give you a link to an email on my computer..... (which was in fact on another hard drive, thus I already had to assemble it just to post this, (again well worth it though)


----------



## aceoky

In KY ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page) 
aceoky Today 01:03 PM


1,450 

8,182 

MY OH MY those TEN people certainly are busy, viewing this thread 8,182 times! :wink:


----------



## KY MUSTANG

aceoky said:


> Sorry Mustang, I'm not going to give you a link to an email on my computer..... (which was in fact on another hard drive, thus I already had to assemble it just to post this, (again well worth it though)


 I do not give a rip about your biased Ohio dnr's crap . He is not going to run down his own states herd management. I mean official P&Y records, not some post out of a magazine either


----------



## aceoky

That right there is funny, you claim biased, when the tags had to be sold for him to use the data, thus HE is NOT the biased one.....those who oppose opportunity at the expense of other hunters ARE "biased" (among other things)

IF you are really so interested go buy the P&Y book, I couldn't care less what they have or don't have, just as I don't care for their club nor their rules, the fact remains some do and in Ohio MANY of them enter their bucks into the "book", disprove that IF you can........


----------



## Jim C

KY MUSTANG said:


> If it was not so darn hot, we could just find us a place and square off lol. Have a good weekend. Everyone but jim c anyway



poor mustang


----------



## thesource

*ITALICS are Aceoky's expert:*

_There is no question that bow hunting continues to see the greatest growth among all implement types. 
_

Kinda depends on your definition of bowhunting now, doesn’t it?

Assuming he means bows plus crossbows, he’s correct – except all the growth is due to crossbows – and that’s good for bowhunting, how????? 

Crossbow hunters have grown from 5% of the total deer hunting population to 43% of the licensed hunters….astronomical growth.  

Meanwhile, bowhunters went from 35% of licensed hunters in the early 80’s to 36% last year – whoopee. No growth, percentage wise.  

"WAIT Source, you are using percentages, which are beyond my mathematical capabilities. I see where the ACTUAL number of bowhunters increased from the early 80’s, even if your stupid percentage say they did not." 

OK. For those who are conceptually challenged, let’s use real numbers, then try to pull it all together.

_In the early 1980s, an estimated 35% of licensed deer hunters hunted with a vertical bow. If we apply this to our 1978 hunter number estimate (see chart above), we had roughly 64,000 (0.35x184,000) vertical bow archers in the early 1980s._


OK – if bows were 35% then 35% of all hunters = 64,000 (64.4K, actually), crossbows were 5% of all hunters in the early 80's so then 5% of all hunters = 9200 crossbowers. Humble beginnings, I guess.

_Based on a study conducted March of 2005, an estimated 36% of approximately 300,000 licensed deer hunters or roughly 110,000 archers hunted with a vertical bow at least once from 2001-2004. _

(108K bowhunters, actually…..he’s rounding here and there) – now we use your dude’s estimation of crossbow hunters last year, 43%. 43% of all hunters = 129000 crossbowers. 

Interesting numbers that we will need to return to.

In the meantime let’s examine the GROWTH in greater detail (that IS what the original issue was about, remember?)

Bowhunters have grown from 64000 to 108000 – that is an increase of 1.7X, in other words they have almost, but not quite doubled in the last 20 years.

Crossbow hunters, in the same timeframe, have gone from 9200 to 129000 – and THAT is an increase of 14X.  


Please remember that THIS is what Aceoky claimed:

MOST "able bodied men" wouldn't use one, and most who try them, likely would find they like archery season, and learn to use another bow...... 

These are all folks who COULD be hunting with bows, but do not because of crossbows. They have not converted to real bow as evidence by the large disparity in the crossbow vs bow numbers and the fact that bow useage remains the same percentage as it was 20 years ago in Ohio. 

In other words, Tonkovich proves Aceoky’s claim to be false.:darkbeer: 






UH OH. Now there is THIS:
_
Please be sure and note that all of my deer hunter number figures apply exclusively to regular licensed adults. They do not include youth, seniors, or landowners._
The very groups that you crossbow pushers proclaim will be included by adding the crossbow to archery season have been excluded from the numbers.

Youths probably use crossbows (after all, you all say that is what they are good for.) Seniors probably use crossbows (after all, you all say that is what they are good for.)

That means the 43% of license holders is actually even higher. 

What is the right number – we don’t know, now do we. Your expert did not include the entire data set, although he is honest enough to note that he didn’t. When you add in landowners, who are not required to even purchase a license, your expert REALLY doesn’t know. 

He has no clue, in actuality….isn’t that funny? (Yet Ace is so slavishly devoted to him that I heard he wanted to have his baby….) 

That actually makes some sense since most estimations of OH total deer hunter numbers are more like 420000 than 300000, including the USFWS. I was going to rip him for the disparity, but his notation may explain it. I’ll have to look more closely and you all will have to wait for the next chapter to see how a stagnant rate of bowhunter growth ( stuck at 35%) has a negative impact for bowhunting in Ohio. (I’m certain most of the smart viewers already understand it completely!):darkbeer:


----------



## Jim C

lets see-lots of Ohioans decided to use crossbows
they made a choice

Source wants to end that choice because of his issues
he can't show us how that choice is deleterious to society or bowhunting other than the pathetic claim that xbows aren't bows

the fact is-NO MATTER WHAT THE FACTS ARE-SOURCE IS AGAINST TREATING xbows the same as compound bows


----------



## aceoky

Free Range said:


> :In other words Source, he can't stand to see his star witness used against him so he is gong to take his toy and go home. See ya.


NO......

In other words it's NO longer AS amusing for me to watch you few make such a "fuss" about how you "think" you're discrediting wildlife biologists which you have neither the standing, education nor credentials to do, IF you did, (again) I'd suggest you take their jobs, since you seem to be so much more "wise" than they are........I see that's not happened though, so I suspect, it's utter BS and not worth my time........simple really


Also In Other Words, since none of you few , have provided ANY relevent data or facts to support YOUR stance, I find it NO longer as interesting to watch you attempt to discredit them when they ARE provided.......something obviosly you and yours can not do......

Continue to make fools of yourselves, I have little doubt that you will, and it will provide entertainment for many..........


----------



## aceoky

Once again source.........

Whatever.......

"Kinda depends on your definition of bowhunting now, doesn’t it?"

YES with YOU it always does, otherwise you'd have LESS than the "nothing" you only now think you have.........whatever....

BTW what IS archery hunting with a cb? (to you I mean source), IS it 

A) Gun Hunting
B) Drag Racing
C) YOU don't have a clue
D) archery hunting 

Now really think hard before you really prove yourself for what you are here.....:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> lets see-lots of Ohioans decided to use crossbows
> they made a choice
> 
> Source wants to* end that choice *
> 
> because of his issues
> 
> he *can't* show us how that choice is deleterious to society or bowhunting other than the pathetic claim that xbows aren't bows
> 
> the fact is-NO MATTER WHAT THE FACTS ARE-SOURCE IS AGAINST TREATING xbows the same as compound bows


Yep!

Sad really isn't it.......


----------



## aceoky

JavaMan said:


> I've read it myself but another choice in a sport doesn't hurt.
> 
> this is funny to watch.
> 
> *Source is over his head displaying his ignorance and he can't even see it.*
> 
> JavaMan



Shhhhh HE doesn't know that........


:banana: :banana: :wave:


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> you're discrediting wildlife biologists which you have neither the standing, education nor credentials to do, IF you did, (again) I'd suggest you take their jobs, since you seem to be so much more "wise" than they are......


I couldn't handle the cut in pay ..... lol.:darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> BTW what IS archery hunting with a cb? (to you I mean source), IS it
> 
> A) Gun Hunting
> B) Drag Racing
> C) YOU don't have a clue
> D) archery hunting
> 
> Now really think hard before you really prove yourself for what you are here.....:cocktail:


None of the above.

To me (which is what you are asking), archery hunting with a crossbow is E) .......Cheating.

Well ....... you did ask!


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> None of the above.
> 
> To me (which is what you are asking), archery hunting with a crossbow is E) .......Cheating.
> 
> Well ....... you did ask!


I did indeed!

There you have it folks, though to some using a compound is also "cheating", so much for "that" ........


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> None of the above.
> 
> To me (which is what you are asking), archery hunting with a crossbow is E) .......Cheating.
> 
> Well ....... you did ask!



who does it cheat source?

it doesn't cheat the deer
it doesn't cheat society 
it doesn't cheat the people who want to use xbows unless you are so arrogant to say you know what is better for them them

so who does it cheat source?


----------



## Jim C

Here is what bothers source-

he apparently doesn't like to shoot a bow
He doesn't like to practice with a bow
He considers that a cost he must pay to bowhunt

its sort of like a football player having to go through conditioning or a track star having to do painful windsprints

he thinks HE IS BEING cheated when someone else can bowhunt without going through that horrible painful "dues paying"

me, I like to shoot
I shoot a bow several times a week
at one point 25-30K times a year.
Bowhunting is just another reason to shoot a bow-I am an archer 
I like practicing

source doesn't
he's mad that some can bowhunt without having to practice as much as he does

yet he isn't against a different season (though he won't tell us how he would accomplish that)
he doesn't want to be "tainted" with xbow archers because they didn't have to pay dues most of us enjoy doing
most of us like to shoot
that's why we are on ARCHERY TALK-we like archery
Source doesn't-but then again, he only whines about xbows so it figures

now source, tell me how your problem should be a sound reason to base public policy on


----------



## ballard

thesource said:


> Meanwhile, bowhunters went from 35% of licensed hunters in the early 80’s to 36% last year – whoopee. No growth, percentage wise.


Uhh. . . .Source, I hate to disagree with you but you got that "36% last year - whoopee" figure wrong. 

According to the Ohio DNR letter, the survey showed that 36% of the polled hunters had submitted that they hunted with a vertical bow "at least once" in the four year period from 2001-2004. 

In reality, they captured a 4 yr. period instead of a 1 yr. period to make it appear as though the percentage of bowhunters actually increased. 

Think about it. What happened between 2001-2004 to cause this demonstrable increase in bowhunters which had remained consistent in the upper 20's%? You're absolutely right, nothing. However, by broadening the period to 4 yrs and narrowing the usage to "at least once", you suddenly locate some new "bowhunters" that didn't exist before. 

But it's not all that bad. Look at it this way. You can now feel free to plunk down your $500 to drive a nifty little race car around your local speedway. Then all you have to do is get NY to conduct similar "Racecar Driver Survey" and ask the same sort of questions that are used in Ohio. Then, you'll be able to report back to all your friends/family that the state of NY has officially declared you a NASCAR driver, just like Dale Earnhardt, and they can throw a big tailgate party for you!!!!


----------



## aceoky

Ya know, whenever I hear this "cheating" or "lazy" foolish BS I can't help but notice you'll never hear gun hunters talking like that about other gun hunters.....

When was the last time anyone heard a hunter say " Well, I choose a 30/30, so I DESERVE more time than Bob who uses a 7mm Mag".....they DON"T each is content with their choice of weapon and has no problem with what someone else is using.........ONLY "bowhunters" (and only a very few at that) seem to be overly concerned with what archery weapon another hunter *chooses* to use...........strange.......yet very "telling" dontcha think.........:lalala: :amen:


----------



## aceoky

I ................

CAN'T be the only one the mere thought of source driving anywhere in a race car scares.........????

:amen:


----------



## thesource

ballard said:


> Uhh. . . .Source, I hate to disagree with you but you got that "36% last year - whoopee" figure wrong.
> 
> According to the Ohio DNR letter, the survey showed that 36% of the polled hunters had submitted that they hunted with a vertical bow "at least once" in the four year period from 2001-2004.
> 
> In reality, they captured a 4 yr. period instead of a 1 yr. period to make it appear as though the percentage of bowhunters actually increased.


You are right, of course.

Even if it has remained constant, I believe that is nothing to celebrate and actually is demonstratable evidence that bowhunting (the REAL type) has been negatively impacted by crossbows. Your point (which is totally valid) only further reinforces the point.

Thanks for the correction.


----------



## Jim C

aceoky said:


> Ya know, whenever I hear this "cheating" or "lazy" foolish BS I can't help but notice you'll never hear gun hunters talking like that about other gun hunters.....
> 
> When was the last time anyone heard a hunter say " Well, I choose a 30/30, so I DESERVE more time than Bob who uses a 7mm Mag".....they DON"T each is content with their choice of weapon and has no problem with what someone else is using.........ONLY "bowhunters" (and only a very few at that) seem to be overly concerned with what archery weapon another hunter *chooses* to use...........strange.......yet very "telling" dontcha think.........:lalala: :amen:



I told you its internally generated psychological issues

Ballard-is bowhunting or society harmed in any way if crossbows are chosen by former compound archers?

compounds completely dominate in most states -in other words, many old bowhunters and most new bowhunters buy compounds rather than trad bows

is that good or bad or is it (my opinion) neither good nor bad


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> Ya know, whenever I hear this "cheating" or "lazy" foolish BS I can't help but notice you'll never hear gun hunters talking like that about other gun hunters.....


I guess you don't spend much time around muzzleloaders. They have their own season you know, and I bet they would be pretty upset if you claimed that since your -06 uses gunpowder, you are a blackpowder guy too and demand all of their MZ season. 

LOL - you are too easy.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You are right, of course.
> 
> Even if it has remained constant, I believe that is nothing to celebrate and actually is demonstratable evidence that bowhunting (the REAL type) has been negatively impacted by crossbows. Your point (which is totally valid) only further reinforces the point.
> 
> Thanks for the correction.



Luddites claimed that real bowhunting was destroyed when compounds took over. some professional archers like Jim Quarles noted that the decline of archery (the sport and pasttime) started because of the compound bow.
I agree with him since people no longer had to practice year round

Yet bowhunting increased

now tell us source-what business is it to tell someone they ought to hunt with a certain kind of bow to preserve bowhunting in the image you want it to be


----------



## aceoky

Ballard nice try, I'll give you that, 

However no matter how you "spin" it, slice it, dice it, or whatever, the fact IS: archery AND DEER hunters thrived for decades with the cb being legal for the entire archery season in Ohio...........period

DECADES, no "four year period" of anything can change that fact......:cocktail: 

Even while "hunter numbers in general" declined DEER hunters increased.......period.........

IOW the crossbow has proven itself to be a "good thing" in Ohio (at the very least).........


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> However no matter how you "spin" it, slice it, dice it, or whatever, the fact IS: archery AND DEER hunters thrived for decades with the cb being legal for the entire archery season in Ohio........


But not for Bowhunting, which has stagnated due to the cannabilistic crossbow. Crossbows are bad for bowhunting, as evidenced by Ohio.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> I guess you don't spend much time around muzzleloaders. They have their own season you know, and I bet they would be pretty upset if you claimed that since your -06 uses gunpowder, you are a blackpowder guy too and demand all of their MZ season.
> 
> LOL - you are too easy.


NO source YOU are "too easy", 

YES they have seperate season, AND smokeless powder and black powder are not even similar (BP is classified as an Explosive, smokeless as a "propellent"), I'm a reloader and ML hunter, as well as an archery hunter...... and I'm VERY much aware of the differnences.......obviously by that comment , one more thing we know you don't know or have a clue about......(that's getting to be a very long list btw)...........


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> But not for Bowhunting, which has stagnated due to the cannabilistic crossbow. Crossbows are bad for bowhunting, as evidenced by Ohio.



stupidity continues. "compounds were bad for bowhunting" using this logic but the fact remains, if there had been no compounds, we wouldn't have nearly as many bowhunters in Ohio. same for crossbows


----------



## awshucks

*in ky*

Source: Could you explain to me/us/the world if a former "real bow hunter" trad or compound in your opinion, decides to leave them on the hook and fill his tags w/ a xbow where the harm or foul is?? Thanks.


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> But not for Bowhunting, which has stagnated due to the cannabilistic crossbow. Crossbows are bad for bowhunting, as evidenced by Ohio.



Wrong again source!!

The "bowhunters" of Ohio, had choices to make, they made them, end of story, so what if many of them CHOSE the cb, without asking what YOU thought about it ...........

Their hunt, their choice, it seems they're more than happy with their choice......but YOU seem to not agree with other hunters who are out there enjoying the archery season, and instead call them names......... 

Also some use trad bows earlyand switch to the cb during the late season when it's colder........again a good thing to be able to do.....more clothing makes drawing harder, NO good reason for them to have that problem, and in Ohio they don't........


----------



## Jim C

awshucks said:


> Source: Could you explain to me/us/the world if a former "real bow hunter" trad or compound in your opinion, decides to leave them on the hook and fill his tags w/ a xbow where the harm or foul is?? Thanks.



that's the million dollar question. I think I have provided the answer but since source won't answer it other than hiding behind the "its not a bow" I doubt you will ever get an explanation


----------



## aceoky

It's been more than proven that in Ky the real reason for fighting the expansion was some didn't want more hunters in "their woods" during archery season.......even here in the last few pages that has been (sadly) admitted......

Rather than being concerned with the future of archery hunting, (again sadly) some things don't seem to change......

Yet no one has proven that it WOULD affect/effect them in any way......."odd" isn't it???


----------



## Jim C

aceoky said:


> It's been more than proven that in Ky the real reason for fighting the expansion was some didn't want more hunters in "their woods" during archery season.......even here in the last few pages that has been (sadly) admitted......
> 
> Rather than being concerned with the future of archery hunting, (again sadly) some things don't seem to change......
> 
> Yet no one has proven that it WOULD affect/effect them in any way......."odd" isn't it???



I deal with discrimination cases. NO ONE admits to discriminating against blacks or women anymore even if they do. In the few cases where that has happened, the racist or bigot always claims there is another reason for the action. When the reason for the action is legitimate, the story usually makes sense. When it doesn't and is a mere facade for a discriminatory animus, the logic is lacking and the defendant usually contradicts himself (and I settle the case:wink: :wink: 

source and Free range try to create a facade for their true motivation. that's why the logic is so poor and filled with contradictions.


----------



## aceoky

Agreed Jim C.

I have a question though; as much time as they each spend *trying* to discredit the data and facts that others present, they never seem to post any of their own...........

Is it because they have none, and if so, is that because they're "too lazy" to do the research...........


:RockOn: :banana: :banana: :wave:


----------



## Jim C

aceoky said:


> Agreed Jim C.
> 
> I have a question though; as much time as they each spend *trying* to discredit the data and facts that others present, they never seem to post any of their own...........
> 
> Is it because they have none, and if so, is that because they're "too lazy" to do the research...........
> 
> 
> :RockOn: :banana: :banana: :wave:



again-they are afraid if they really revealed what motivates them, the PBS and the Poop and Dung cultists it would brand them as selfish.

they have to hide behind goobledy ****

have you ever debated a hard core gun hater? they claim they want to ban guns because of crime

so ask them if they support CCW licenses which-at worst don't increase crime but usually decrease it

ask them if they supported the Hughes amendment which made future manufacture of machine g uns for licensed civilians illegal

then note that other than a dayton cop, there is not a single crime ever recorded committed by a licensed owner

they get all tangled up because their true reason is to ban guns, not stop crime and laws that prevent crime but don't ban guns they oppose while they support bans that have nothing to do with crime control


----------



## JavaMan

Jim C said:


> lets see-lots of Ohioans decided to use crossbows
> they made a choice
> 
> Source wants to end that choice because of his issues
> he can't show us how that choice is deleterious to society or bowhunting other than the pathetic claim that xbows aren't bows
> 
> the fact is-NO MATTER WHAT THE FACTS ARE-SOURCE IS AGAINST TREATING xbows the same as compound bows


when you have self esteem issues as Mr Source obviously has what do you expect?

posting on this board and getting responses is the most attention he's ever got. 

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

JavaMan said:


> when you have self esteem issues as Mr Source obviously has what do you expect?
> 
> posting on this board and getting responses is the most attention he's ever got.
> 
> JavaMan



It all comes down to a basic question for KY, Ohio and the rest of the country

what is more important-letting people use what bows they want given there is no evidence that including xbows will have any objective problems

Or keeping the psyche's of people like Source and Free Range happy

let people have choice or keep the selfish happy

there really is no argument among objective people


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> again-they are afraid if they really revealed what motivates them, the PBS and the Poop and Dung cultists it would brand them as selfish.
> 
> they have to hide behind goobledy ****
> 
> have you ever debated a hard core gun hater? they claim they want to ban guns because of crime
> 
> so ask them if they support CCW licenses which-at worst don't increase crime but usually decrease it
> 
> ask them if they supported the Hughes amendment which made future manufacture of machine g uns for licensed civilians illegal
> 
> then note that other than a dayton cop, there is not a single crime ever recorded committed by a licensed owner
> 
> they get all tangled up because their true reason is to ban guns, not stop crime and laws that prevent crime but don't ban guns they oppose while they support bans that have nothing to do with crime control



Yep been there done that! They are fun, though not so "bright" ......:darkbeer: 

But you're once again correct; it's a "circular" thing around and around to avoid the REAL "reasons" for both .......

I find it highly amusing, that both source and FR continue to *try* to dispute real hard data, but never offer ANY of their own.....yet they expect anyone to actually take them seriously........

They certianly spend too much of their time being "concerned" what other archery hunters wish to use....all the time defending 99% let off compounds!!!

Now THAT is entertainment, (though not much else)...
:RockOn: :banana: :banana:

Planning a "little trip" for at least part of this weekend.(hope they're biting in this heat)......so "carry on all"...


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> It's been more than proven that in Ky the real reason for fighting the expansion was some didn't want more hunters in "their woods" during archery season.......



Actually, this just another untruth (that means LIE). 

The KY survey that you hold in such high regard proved that the biggest reason that those opposed were against crossbow intrusion into KY archery season is that they "do not believe a crossbow is a bow."

It is a documented FACT..... shame on you for fibbing.


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> I find it highly amusing, that both source and FR continue to *try* to dispute real hard data, but never offer ANY of their own.....yet they expect anyone to actually take them seriously........


 

Your "real hard data" sucks, as I will now demonstrate using data from ESPN Outdoors provided by Mike Tonkovich:

_*Season forecast:* Ohio Division of Wildlife deer biologist Mike Tonkovich reports ……. 

*Number of licensed deer hunters:* 350,000 (Note: Tonkovich indicates that landowners are not required to purchase a hunting license or deer permit in Ohio. In most years, he feels that the state has somewhere in the neighborhood of 125,000 landowners hunting deer. Therefore, landowners are included in the hunter number estimates that Tonkovich has provided below.)

Deer hunter success rates: 32 percent.
*Number of bowhunters: *Approximately 250,000.
*Bowhunter success rates:* 16 percent.
Number of muzzleloader hunters: 200,000.
Muzzleloader success rates: 11 percent.
Number of firearm hunters: 400,000.
Firearm success rates: 28 percent.
2004 harvest: 216,443 deer.
*Bow harvest: *60,626 deer.
Muzzleloader harvest: 24,765 deer.
Firearm harvest: 123,041 deer._

OK – given that the entire data set is based on what your boy Tonkovich “feels” is true  (so much for HARD data – lol) let’s see what we get, here.

250.000 “bowhunters “ (they really mean bowhunters + faux bowhunters, AKA crossbowers) with a success rate of 16% = 40,000 “archery” kills.

Uh – oh. We have trouble right out of the blocks. Tonkovich had reported 
60626 as the “bow” harvest. Hmmmmm – that would actually be a 25% harvest rate.

Damn biologists always have trouble with math. 

OK, your EXPERT is *wrong *someplace. Either there are way more “archers” than he thinks there are, or he has screwed up the harvest rate calculation.

Not a good start. Chalk up 1 for thesource.

Don't worry kids. I volunteer to do the math for our troubled biologist. Let's take a different angle...Since he states in his letter that “In 1989, the crossbow harvest exceeded the vertical bow harvest for the first time and today accounts for nearly 60% of the total archery harvest” and we assume what he does, that the success rate is identical for crossbows and bows, we can calculate the number of crossbowers and bowhunters from the data he gave to ESPN above:

60% of 250000 = 150000 crossbowers
40% of 250000 = 100000 bowhunters

Grrrrr – more trouble. He stated in his letter to you that there were 129000 xbow guys, but using his numbers here its way more, like 150000. Wait … he did say that the first was only licensed adult hunters, and this number includes what he “feels” is everyone. OK let’s use this number.

Wait – more trouble.  Even using the higher numbers of this data set, you notice that the vertical bow hunter is actually smaller than what he told you. GASP – less bowhunters! He had said 108,000, this is 100,000. 

The difference in the letter to you was 20000, but the real difference is actually 50000!!!!!

Your EXPERT has made another mistake. 
Chalk up another for thesource.



What the heck is going on in Ohio. Do YOU know? Does TONKOVICH know? Does ANYBODY know?

LOL.

Yea – you’re right hard and bulletproof data - ROFLMAO


----------



## thesource

ballard said:


> Uhh. . . .Source, I hate to disagree with you but you got that "36% last year - whoopee" figure wrong.
> 
> According to the Ohio DNR letter, the survey showed that 36% of the polled hunters had submitted that they hunted with a vertical bow "at least once" in the four year period from 2001-2004.
> 
> In reality, they captured a 4 yr. period instead of a 1 yr. period to make it appear as though the percentage of bowhunters actually increased.
> 
> Think about it. What happened between 2001-2004 to cause this demonstrable increase in bowhunters which had remained consistent in the upper 20's%? You're absolutely right, nothing. However, by broadening the period to 4 yrs and narrowing the usage to "at least once", you suddenly locate some new "bowhunters" that didn't exist before.


Yea - you are right, and I crunched some more of the math troubled "expert's" numbers to help prove your point.


Tonkovich stated that in 2005 there were 108000 bowhunters and 129000 crossbow hunters. He also stated that the crossbow harvest was 60% of the total harvest. He has stated in the past that he "feels" the harvest rate is similar for both weapons (and JimC claims its identical, not sure how he knows that, mystic power I guess), so we can extrapolate the 60% to hunter numbers since if 60% of the total kill is by crossbowers, 60% of the total "archers" must therfore be crossbowers.

If we add together Tonkovich's numbers of crossbowers and bowhunters to get total archers, we get 237000.

60% of those are crossbowers - that means 142000 are crossbowers (Not what he said, and the 3rd different number we see for crossbowers in OH last year, but that is not the point.)

That leaves 92000 as bowhunters, which is only 30% of the 300000 licensed hunters, not 36% as Tonkovich stated.

That is a lot closer to the 29% you expected than the 36% that Tonkovich claimed.

I declare BALLARD the winner!:usa2:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Actually, this just another untruth (that means LIE).
> 
> The KY survey that you hold in such high regard proved that the biggest reason that those opposed were against crossbow intrusion into KY archery season is that they "do not believe a crossbow is a bow."
> 
> It is a documented FACT..... shame on you for fibbing.


Posts like this do nothing other than make Kentucky bowhunters look stupid and selfish

what they say is they don't want to share-most of them I doubt could fashion an intelligent reason to counter what the IBO, the NFAA and The NAA has already accepted as an archery weapon


----------



## JavaMan

I get a kick how Mr Source divides crossbowers and bowhunters as if they are not ALL bowhunters. It matters not and I believe lots of bowhunters use both types of archery equipment and some may alternate between all archery equipment.

Another thing amusing is Mr Source seems to think anyone would listen to him-an an anonymous poster with obvious mental problems over someone who actually works at the DNR and we have his real name.



JavaMan


----------



## thesource

JavaMan said:


> Another thing amusing is Mr Source seems to think anyone would listen to him-an an anonymous poster with obvious mental problems over someone who actually works at the DNR and we have his real name.
> JavaMan


Math is math, Doug.

If my math is right, then I'm right.

You can check my math, if you feel inclined.

Report back to me when you're done...lol.


----------



## JavaMan

Mr Source

I am NOT Doug. I haven't a clue what you are talking about.

No one listens to you. It doesn't matter if you are right mathematically or not. It comes with the territory of being considered insane and with self esteem issues.

We've got Mike's name but NO ONE knows who you are because you hide behind a pc screen.

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

Whatever, Doug.

My correct math shows that Tonkovich can't be right.

People too blinded by their agenda can ignore mathematical reality, but objective and reasonable people must be swayed by the pure fact that is math.

Now we know which you are....big surprise there, eh?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Whatever, Doug.
> 
> My correct math shows that Tonkovich can't be right.
> 
> People too blinded by their agenda can ignore mathematical reality, but objective and reasonable people must be swayed by the pure fact that is math.
> 
> Now we know which you are....big surprise there, eh?



why do you hide behind math "bob" when we all know that numbers and facts have nothing to do with your rant. Claiming a crossbow is not a bow is not a math issue-its a pathetic argument based on the fact that you think you can use it as a substitute for logic


----------



## JavaMan

Jim C said:


> why do you hide behind math "bob" when we all know that numbers and facts have nothing to do with your rant. Claiming a crossbow is not a bow is not a math issue-its a pathetic argument based on the fact that you think you can use it as a substitute for logic


that was my thoughts exactly. Mr Source creates these facade arguments but we all know what his true reasons are.

why not just say it?

"I am a poor bowhunter who almost never gets an animal. I don't like to practice. I am jealous of anyone who chooses to hunt with a crossbow because they will get chances at deer I will not get. They will get their pictures taken with the deer that I could never hope to get.

even though I fail to get a deer, when questioned I point to how hard my chosen way of bowhunting is and that I am too masculine to hunt another way. It makes me feel good.

If someone bagged a deer with a crossbow, and had their picture taken, it would diminish me.

that's why I want to restrict people from using a crossbow."


JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

JavaMan said:


> that was my thoughts exactly. Mr Source creates these facade arguments but we all know what his true reasons are.
> 
> why not just say it?
> 
> "I am a poor bowhunter who almost never gets an animal. I don't like to practice. I am jealous of anyone who chooses to hunt with a crossbow because they will get chances at deer I will not get. They will get their pictures taken with the deer that I could never hope to get.
> 
> even though I fail to get a deer, when questioned I point to how hard my chosen way of bowhunting is and that I am too masculine to hunt another way. It makes me feel good.
> 
> If someone bagged a deer with a crossbow, and had their picture taken, it would diminish me.
> 
> that's why I want to restrict people from using a crossbow."
> 
> 
> JavaMan


that's a good part of it.

its f un seeing all this spam of numbers when numbers has nothing to do with the opposition


----------



## aceoky

thesource said:


> Actually, this just another untruth (that means LIE).
> 
> The KY survey that you hold in such high regard proved that the biggest reason that those opposed were against crossbow intrusion into KY archery season is that they "do not believe a crossbow is a bow."
> 
> It is a documented FACT..... shame on you for fibbing.


Just to make " it easy on you " source.......that WAS a minorty (and an obvious one)..........IOW NOT enough to even start with LIE.....(especially from you).......

And since YOU did bring that up........it's "interesting " to note the "bowhunters" by a VAST MAJORITY, in Ky SUPPROTED FULL EXPANSION......... (good move.........thank you):cocktail:


----------



## dalebow

no one will answer me, give out a tag for a buck and doe, any weapon and once your tag is filled your done, we will see how many dedicated x-gun hunters would choose their x-gun over their 300 mag like a lot of bowhunters do.....you pro x-gun guys are pathetic, who gives a rats ass about who wanted what, your season is expanded so be happy and go on why do you want to debate it so much????

Get a life!!

Maybe go on a bear hunt, or moose hunt, like I am with my longbow next year...even take your x-gun:darkbeer:


----------



## JavaMan

dalebow said:


> no one will answer me, give out a tag for a buck and doe, any weapon and once your tag is filled your done, we will see how many dedicated x-gun hunters would choose their x-gun over their 300 mag like a lot of bowhunters do.....you pro x-gun guys are pathetic, who gives a rats ass about who wanted what, your season is expanded so be happy and go on why do you want to debate it so much????
> 
> Get a life!!
> 
> Maybe go on a bear hunt, or moose hunt, like I am with my longbow next year...even take your x-gun:darkbeer:


I think you should grow up. Bowhunting is a recreational sport. No need to forsake a crossbow. I want to do it all. 

Myself, while I enjoy bowhunting and have bowhunted in gun season certainly have no plans of forsaking my firearms. I enjoy hunting with them as well.

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Here is what bothers source-
> 
> he apparently doesn't like to shoot a bow
> He doesn't like to practice with a bow
> He considers that a cost he must pay to bowhunt
> 
> its sort of like a football player having to go through conditioning or a track star having to do painful windsprints
> 
> he thinks HE IS BEING cheated when someone else can bowhunt without going through that horrible painful "dues paying"



This post shows how TOTALLY CLUELESS you are.

I love shooting, love practicing with bows. I consider it an ESSENTIAL and NECESSARY part, an inseparable part of bowhunting. Shooting a bow IS bowhunting.

YOU want to eliminate the need for it - I believe that without it it is no longer bowhunting.

You couldn't have been farther from the truth....


You cannot be BOWHUNTING and you have no business in BOWSEASON if you cannot shoot a BOW..... hold it like a bow, draw it like a bow, anchor it like a bow, aim it like a bow, release it like a bow.

Scopes and triggers, point and shoot has no business in BOWseason, whether that be an inline muzzleloader or your beloved crossbow.


----------



## thesource

JavaMan said:


> that was my thoughts exactly. Mr Source creates these facade arguments but we all know what his true reasons are.
> 
> why not just say it?
> "I am a poor bowhunter who almost never gets an animal. I don't like to practice. I am jealous of anyone who chooses to hunt with a crossbow because they will get chances at deer I will not get. They will get their pictures taken with the deer that I could never hope to get.
> even though I fail to get a deer, when questioned I point to how hard my chosen way of bowhunting is and that I am too masculine to hunt another way. It makes me feel good.
> If someone bagged a deer with a crossbow, and had their picture taken, it would diminish me.
> that's why I want to restrict people from using a crossbow."
> JavaMan



Poor DougK.

This is, what, your 7th or 8th sock puppet? 

What a pathetic joke that you must continuously violate the rules just to get a couple of shots in at me.

People wonder why it appears at times that I hold crossbowers in such low esteem.....perhaps it is guys like you, who flaunt their unwillingness to follow rules and regulations, that cause me to believe that crossbow advocates possess low or no character.

Shameful behavior - but what else would I expect?


----------



## awshucks

that cause me to believe that crossbow advocates possess low or no character.

Another broad stroke of the erroneous brush that has been once again dipped in the bucket of slanderous paint.


----------



## JavaMan

Mr Source

you need to stop pointing fingers at people. as I stated earlier, PROVE IT.

I've never posted here before, and do not know what you are talking about.

You've got a mental problem because no adult posts over 2600 times on how others should shoot a bow. All related to your lack of self esteem issue and your failures in not only bowhunting, archery, but personal disappointments as well. 

TELL ME, I don't want to hear your "religion" on archery. If a crossbow isn't a bow and is not archery, why do crossbow archers participate in the World Archery Festival? Why do they participate at the IBO?

After all, since a crossbow isn't archery, and is a type of rifle shooting, then why are these archers not part of some firearms competition?

I must say I think it's funny how you claim you do this. Shoot a BOW. But like all your claims they are never ever backed up. You hide behind a PC screen, NO ONE knows who you are. No pictures of any of the animals you've ever pretended to have shot. Yet from a postion of cover, and with a clear mental problem expect rational adults to consider your opinions over those of identifial sources. You don't shoot a bow, you don't bowhunt, and you've never bagged a deer. You know nothing about archery.

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

awshucks said:


> that cause me to believe that crossbow advocates possess low or no character.
> 
> Another broad stroke of the erroneous brush that has been once again dipped in the bucket of slanderous paint.


Sorry if it offends you.

I've stated numerous times that I'm sure there are some fine upstanding citizens out there who hunt with a crossbow - if you are one of them, good for you.

I have also stated that the vast majority of crossbow advocates that I have encountered on this site and others do not represent crossbowers as a whole particularly well.

They do not tell the truth - they spin and misrepresent intentionally. They say the most awful things about bowhunters. It is shameful, really.

You worry about me painting with a broad brush, and call my statements slanderous... WHERE is your righteous indignation when those representing you and other crossbows slander bowhunters?

Bowhunters, by definition, are NOT antihunters....WHY do I not here you speaking out to correct them? WHY do I not see you telling them to obey the forum rules, stop with the personal attacks, behave like classy representatives of your crossbow community?

I see - _that's _different, right?


----------



## JavaMan

thesource said:


> This post shows how TOTALLY CLUELESS you are.
> 
> I love shooting, love practicing with bows. I consider it an ESSENTIAL and NECESSARY part, an inseparable part of bowhunting. Shooting a bow IS bowhunting.
> 
> YOU want to eliminate the need for it - I believe that without it it is no longer bowhunting.
> 
> You couldn't have been farther from the truth....
> 
> 
> You cannot be BOWHUNTING and you have no business in BOWSEASON if you cannot shoot a BOW....._ hold it like a bow, draw it like a bow, anchor it like a bow, aim it like a bow, release it like a bow.
> 
> Scopes and triggers, point and shoot has no business in BOWseason, whether that be an inline muzzleloader or your beloved crossbow_.


Most archers use release aids, of course you wouldn't know that, and yes there are scopes for bows available. You wouldn't know that as well. I can hold a 70lb compound with 80% let off extremely easy at full draw, but try that with a recurve.

and a crossbow is a bow, just because you don't like it, or more accurate no nothing about it, doesn't make it so.

You know, I really don't like the idea of you bowhunting or carrying ANY weapon based on your mental instability and self esteem issues. You could be dangerous in the woods. We should ban you from that and maybe they have.

JavaMan


----------



## JavaMan

thesource said:


> Sorry if it offends you.
> 
> I've stated numerous times that I'm sure there are some fine upstanding citizens out there who hunt with a crossbow - if you are one of them, good for you.
> 
> I have also stated that the vast majority of crossbow advocates that I have encountered on this site and others do not represent crossbowers as a whole particularly well.
> 
> They do not tell the truth - they spin and misrepresent intentionally. They say the most awful things about bowhunters. It is shameful, really.
> 
> You worry about me painting with a broad brush, and call my statements slanderous... WHERE is your righteous indignation when those representing you and other crossbows slander bowhunters?
> 
> Bowhunters, by definition, are NOT antihunters....WHY do I not here you speaking out to correct them? WHY do I not see you telling them to obey the forum rules, stop with the personal attacks, behave like classy representatives of your crossbow community?
> 
> I see - _that's _different, right?


Mr Source, I see another lie from you.

We've stated a crossbow is a bow and is part of major archery organizations. Is part of the ATA.

All that is true.

You, on the other hand, lie with almost every post, even the very last one.

Does anyone here think Mr Source is suffering from a Messiah Complex? Or some sort of archery-saviour complex? He's very irrational.

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

JavaMan said:


> You've got a mental problem because no adult posts over 2600 times on how others should shoot a bow. All related to your lack of self esteem issue and your failures in not only bowhunting, archery, but personal disappointments as well.



LOL - and what would you say about someone who has spent 28 of his 30 posts sniveling and attacking a single poster after getting booted off AT 7 times for posting the same exact drivel in violation of forum rules, hmmm? 


I think the shrink had better work with you, first, Doug......


----------



## Jim C

dalebow said:


> no one will answer me, give out a tag for a buck and doe, any weapon and once your tag is filled your done, we will see how many dedicated x-gun hunters would choose their x-gun over their 300 mag like a lot of bowhunters do.....you pro x-gun guys are pathetic, who gives a rats ass about who wanted what, your season is expanded so be happy and go on why do you want to debate it so much????
> 
> Get a life!!
> 
> Maybe go on a bear hunt, or moose hunt, like I am with my longbow next year...even take your x-gun:darkbeer:



poor Dale-no clue of what you are talking about. Calling it an xgun shows me I am dealing with someone who thinks just because he has an opinion it ought to count as much as those of us who actually understand this issue. Dale apparently is unable to deal with the fact that a crossbow and a compound bow are essentially the same in EVERY area that really matters and he just doesn't have the ability to deal with that fact.

Hence the smarmy "crossgun" arguments.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> This post shows how TOTALLY CLUELESS you are.
> 
> I love shooting, love practicing with bows. I consider it an ESSENTIAL and NECESSARY part, an inseparable part of bowhunting. Shooting a bow IS bowhunting.
> 
> YOU want to eliminate the need for it - I believe that without it it is no longer bowhunting.
> 
> You couldn't have been farther from the truth....
> 
> 
> You cannot be BOWHUNTING and you have no business in BOWSEASON if you cannot shoot a BOW..... hold it like a bow, draw it like a bow, anchor it like a bow, aim it like a bow, release it like a bow.
> 
> Scopes and triggers, point and shoot has no business in BOWseason, whether that be an inline muzzleloader or your beloved crossbow.


more psychotic nonsense-Source there are no requirements that people actually practice before bowhunting. Crossbows are bows Source and everyone with a brain who doesn't have an agenda realizes that. You have never explained to us your fixation on how other people bowhunt and if you like to practice how are you hurt if others pick a bow that doesn't require as much practice (allegedly-we have no idea if you actually practice since all we have is your word) as you have to?


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> more psychotic nonsense-Source there are no requirements that people actually practice before bowhunting. Crossbows are bows Source and everyone with a brain who doesn't have an agenda realizes that. You have never explained to us your fixation on how other people bowhunt and if you like to practice how are you hurt if others pick a bow that doesn't require as much practice (allegedly-we have no idea if you actually practice since all we have is your word) as you have to?



Duh, Jim .... where in my post does it say ANYTHING about practice - why do you just make stuff up? 

No, what it talks about is the steps required to shoot a bow, and that is what really defines a bow.

You can define one anyway you would like (and you have), but you cannot define a bow for me. I know what it takes to shoot a bow, and point and shoot is not it.

That is the procedure to shoot a gun, though - even a stringgun...LOL.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Duh, Jim .... where in my post does it say ANYTHING about practice - why do you just make stuff up?
> 
> No, what it talks about is the steps required to shoot a bow, and that is what really defines a bow.
> 
> You can define one anyway you would like (and you have), but you cannot define a bow for me. I know what it takes to shoot a bow, and point and shoot is not it.
> 
> That is the procedure to shoot a gun, though - even a stringgun...LOL.



according to Ann Hoyt, compounds (she has taken game for decades with all kinds of bows-longbows, recurves, compounds and ten point xbows) shooting a compound teaches you to aim while shooting a recurve teaches you how to shoot a bow. A compound bow with high letoff and a peep sight and pin along with a mechanical release has shortcut all the essential archery skills and I have no problem with that.

your pathetic rants that a crossbow is so much different is based on your mental issues-not on an objective analysis of the skill requirements. As I noted, with the introduction of compound bows, learning to shoot was no longer the most time intensive skill needed to bowhunt well

Again, tell us why you care so much

I note you didn't have the stones to tell us who a crossbow archer is cheating by using a crossbow in archery season-can you answer that using logic rather than you own self esteem issues?


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> according to Ann Hoyt, compounds (she has taken game for decades with all kinds of bows-longbows, recurves, compounds and ten point xbows) shooting a compound teaches you to aim while shooting a recurve teaches you how to shoot a bow.


I could care less what Ann Hoyt's opinion is on the matter.



Jim C said:


> A compound bow with high letoff and a peep sight and pin along with a mechanical release has shortcut all the essential archery skills and I have no problem with that.


I could care less what your opinion is on the matter.


Hand held and hand drawn is what matters.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I could care less what Ann Hoyt's opinion is on the matter.


>>That shows how clueless you are source>>>>



thesource said:


> I could care less what your opinion is on the matter.
> 
> 
> Hand held and hand drawn is what matters.


trust me source-we don't care what you think matters since you have no standing in archery and thus your Opinion has no worth. 

I am still awaiting your explaination who is "CHEATED" by someone using a crossbow


----------



## awshucks

Source: If there's rules broken, that is the mods job. I haven't seen any one attack bowhunters on here, in fact alot of the xbow side shoot both. I'm sure out of 1500 posts you can drag something up, I don't care to debate w/ you, I'm not as talented in that department as you are. It's the 8500 views that concern me, and the fact that so far I've been called lazy, unethical, respectless, ect. Actually, myself and 499,999 others that use xbows to hunt.
Sound familiar?
And, you haven't answered a question I asked you, which is if a guy has 3 tags, fills two with verts and one w/ xbow, where's the difference, harm, or foul??


----------



## thesource

awshucks said:


> I haven't seen any one attack bowhunters on here


I don't believe you.




awshucks said:


> in fact alot of the xbow side shoot both.


I don't believe that either.



awshucks said:


> so far I've been called lazy, unethical, respectless, ect.


No one has personally attacked you - that would be against the rules. Perhaps you are taking things too personally?



awshucks said:


> Actually, myself and 499,999 others that use xbows to hunt.


I don't believe THAT either. Please provide evidence that there are 500,000 crossbow hunters.



awshucks said:


> And, you haven't answered a question I asked you, which is if a guy has 3 tags, fills two with verts and one w/ xbow, where's the difference, harm, or foul??


Why stop there? Why not fill the tags with guns, too? Oh - I see. They aren't allowed in bowseason. They don't BELONG in bowseason.

I bet you can figure out the rest of it from there...yes?


----------



## awshucks

Source: Whether you believe me or nor is irrelevant. As to the 500,000 [est]crossbow hunters in North America, prove it wrong or find it like I did.

Here' a little trivia for ya. "Bow" Season is a slang term for "Archery" Season.
While you personally may not consider a crossbow a bow, it is archery equipment, and that is the main reason you will need to live w/ them sooner or later. I will give you credit, you do not try to spread lies and misinformation on the abilities of xbows like some do. And, I'm not in favor of the personal snide remarks made by either side about sanity, ect. Have a good season.


----------



## Free Range

> Mr Source
> 
> I am NOT Doug. I haven't a clue what you are talking about.
> 
> No one listens to you. It doesn't matter if you are right mathematically or not. It comes with the territory of being considered insane and with self esteem issues.
> 
> We've got Mike's name but NO ONE knows who you are because you hide behind a pc screen.
> 
> JavaMan



Insane or not, if the math is right, and by the way he is using the numbers provided by Mike, then Source is right. I believe math over someone’s opinion, and you will notice Source provided (just for you Ace) Real numbers, and didn’t try to make a huge leap to “try” and connect what is clearly an agenda driven outcome, like Mike and Ace, and the rest of the Anti-bowhunters have. 



> And since YOU did bring that up........it's "interesting " to note the "bowhunters" by a VAST MAJORITY, in Ky SUPPROTED FULL EXPANSION.........


Ace, shame on you, the “bowhunters” surveyed, supported or didn’t care about expansion, not all were surveyed, and not all that were surveyed were bowhunters.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Insane or not, if the math is right, and by the way he is using the numbers provided by Mike, then Source is right. I believe math over someone’s opinion, and you will notice Source provided (just for you Ace) Real numbers, and didn’t try to make a huge leap to “try” and connect what is clearly an agenda driven outcome, like Mike and Ace, and the rest of the Anti-bowhunters have.
> 
> 
> 
> Ace, shame on you, the “bowhunters” surveyed, supported or didn’t care about expansion, not all were surveyed, and not all that were surveyed were bowhunters.



who cares Free Range? the season belongs to everyone, not just "We got ours screw the rest" types


----------



## thesource

The season already belongs to everyone who is willing to use a bow.

Duh.


----------



## thesource

awshucks said:


> As to the 500,000 [est]crossbow hunters in North America, prove it wrong or find it like I did.


Oh .... the whole continent. MAYBE that's true, but who actually counts Canada? LOL. 



awshucks said:


> Here' a little trivia for ya. "Bow" Season is a slang term for "Archery" Season.


Actually, you overreach. Its more than slang. Multiple states call it "Bowseason." Here in NY, we have what's called a "Bowhunting stamp" for our license.




awshucks said:


> Have a good season.


Thanks, you too.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> The season already belongs to everyone who is willing to use a bow.
> 
> Duh.



crossbows are bows and you ought to read the legislative history sometimes Source

it might disabuse you of some of your stupid claims


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> crossbows are bows and you ought to read the legislative history sometimes Source
> 
> it might disabuse you of some of your stupid claims



LOL...so you say. Oh, yea. and Ann Hoyt, too....

Whatever.

You might try reading each state's definition of a bow. Perhaps that might disabuse you of some of your stupid claims....

(Pssst - here's a secret. Almost all agree with me.)


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL...so you say. Oh, yea. and Ann Hoyt, too....
> 
> Whatever.
> 
> You might try reading each state's definition of a bow. Perhaps that might disabuse you of some of your stupid claims....
> 
> (Pssst - here's a secret. Almost all agree with me.)



Your biggest problem-or should I say one of your major problems is you confuse a legal definition of legal hunting tackle versus the objective definition. When the legal definition changes you have no argument whatsoever

as to agreement-so what-most whites didn't think Blacks should be able to vote in the south at certain times either Source

what is funny is how many states accept xbows in archery season-they don't accept guns for the disabled.

You still haven't explained who is cheated when I or another archer uses a crossbow


----------



## thesource

So I guess NYB is right.,,,

let even one person use a crossbow during archery season, no matter how much they need the assistance, and all of a sudden EVERYONE thinks that means crossbows are OK, they can use a crossbow and become a bowhunter too.

LOL. Tell me again ..... Because we give extra advantage to the disabled and allow them to use a crossbow in bowseason, that means its OK for you to use one too, even though you are perfectly capable of using a real bow. Does THAT about cover it? In other words, you want to usurp all the advantages of the physically challenged even though you have none of the physical challenges. 

Do you park in Handicapped spots, too, just to avoid the walk?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> So I guess NYB is right.,,,
> 
> let even one person use a crossbow during archery season, no matter how much they need the assistance, and all of a sudden EVERYONE thinks that means crossbows are OK, they can use a crossbow and become a bowhunter too.
> 
> LOL. Tell me again ..... Because we give extra advantage to the disabled and allow them to use a crossbow in bowseason, that means its OK for you to use one too, even though you are perfectly capable of using a real bow. Does THAT about cover it? In other words, you want to usurp all the advantages of the physically challenged even though you have none of the physical challenges.
> 
> Do you park in Handicapped spots, too, just to avoid the walk?


You are avoiding reality again source.
Parking in a handicapped spot hurts someone who needs it
Using a crossbow in a recreational activity only hurts the egos of people with advanced mental issues. You again are too ignorant to understand the difference between "ease of use" and an advantage. Its like saying a car that has brake controls on the steering column (allowing someone who is missing a leg or use of his lower extremities to drive) gives him and advantage in driving over you.

You still haven't told us who is cheated by the use of crossbows. we know its people with mental problems but lets see if you have the ability to answer the question


----------



## thesource

JIm -

If you need to use a "bow" for physically disabled so you can feel like a bowhunter, have at it .... in Ohio.

Here in NY, bring a real bow or stay home.

Enough said.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> JIm -
> 
> If you need to use a "bow" for physically disabled so you can feel like a bowhunter, have at it .... in Ohio.
> 
> Here in NY, bring a real bow or stay home.
> 
> Enough said.


what are you going to do when NY casts off the veil of ignorance and the shroud of stupidity and recognizes that the xbow is as surely a bow as the compound bow.

Why do people use compound bows when-with hard work, they can shoot a recurve well enough to hunt with?


----------



## JavaMan

JimC

as you can see this Mr Source is extremely mentally ill. Not only does he keep saying I am someone I am not, but he continues to make an absolute fool of himself, and yet doesn't realize it.

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Why do people use compound bows when-with hard work, they can shoot a recurve well enough to hunt with?



LOL.

That's an entirely different question than why able people feel they need the same advantages as the physically challenged, now isn't it?


----------



## JavaMan

anyone wonder if Mr Source has a life outside this board?

I can see it now, that when off the board and with his wife and kids he burdens them with this obsession on how another might carry an crossbow. It burdens him at work. He can't get to sleep at night for thinking about it.

Every time he picks up an archery catalog and sees a crossbow it sickens him. Picks up an archery magazine and sees a crossbow and it upsets him.

it's funny.

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> That's an entirely different question than why able people feel they need the same advantages as the physically challenged, now isn't it?



Hollis Allen invented the compound bow to serve the needs of a disabled relative IIRC. Every idiotic argument directed at crossbows by you and your ilk Source is basically the same stupidity that the anti-compound cultists brayed about 30 or so years ago

You again blindly confuse "ease of use" with advantages/ I used to think it was due to ignorance on your part-now its obviously dishonesty


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> You again blindly confuse "ease of use" with advantages/ I used to think it was due to ignorance on your part-now its obviously dishonesty



LOL - more justification why it is OK for you to use the physically challenged's weapon, Jim?

I do not confuse "ease of use" with anything, bigmouth.

You confuse actually needing archery skills to draw, hold, anchor, aim and release with the point and shoot skillset of a crossbow or a gun.

Silly boy.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL - more justification why it is OK for you to use the physically challenged's weapon, Jim?
> 
> I do not confuse "ease of use" with anything, bigmouth.
> 
> You confuse actually needing archery skills to draw, hold, anchor, aim and release with the point and shoot skillset of a crossbow or a gun.
> 
> Silly boy.



You are again dishonest. A compound bow was designed to aid the handicapped. If a handicapped archer uses a compound bow then its a "physically challenged's weapon" If I use a compound bow its not

same with a crossbow. YOu still haven't answered the important questions source-what sort of mental issues cause you to get so upset over what sort of bow others want to use.


----------



## thesource

LOL - you are a joke.

Nice try - no dodging allowed.

Compounds are mainstream in 50 states. Crossbows are allowed only for the physically challenged in the vast majority of states to allow those with physical challenges to overcome the physical difficulty of hunting with real bows. You are using their weapon for the advantage it gives, while they use it just to stay in the game.

Have you no shame?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL - you are a joke.
> 
> Nice try - no dodging allowed.
> 
> Compounds are mainstream in 50 states. Crossbows are allowed only for the physically challenged in the vast majority of states to allow those with physical challenges to overcome the physical difficulty of hunting with real bows. You are using their weapon for the advantage it gives, while they use it just to stay in the game.
> 
> Have you no shame?



and that has happened in the last thirty years. Crossbows will be the mainstream in our lifetime source. Xbows don't give me any advantage source. Of course since you aren't an archer you wouldn't understand that.


----------



## JavaMan

Mr Source

Jim asked you about your mental issues.

tell us about them.

JavaMan


----------



## awshucks

Actually, Source, the breakdown on crossbows being legal is as follows:

Illegal: 3 states [NY, OR, NV]
Allowed archery 11 states
Allowed Handi-capped 27 states
Allowed gun season 13 states
Allowed cb season: 1 state
Allowed by age: 2 states

There is of course some overlap, and it is an ever changing [upward] list.
I did not count NY in handi-capped due to bs breath tube/iron lung provision.


----------



## Jim C

awshucks said:


> Actually, Source, the breakdown on crossbows being legal is as follows:
> 
> Illegal: 3 states [NY, OR, NV]
> Allowed archery 11 states
> Allowed Handi-capped 27 states
> Allowed gun season 13 states
> Allowed cb season: 1 state
> Allowed by age: 2 states
> 
> There is of course some overlap, and it is an ever changing [upward] list.
> I did not count NY in handi-capped due to bs breath tube/iron lung provision.


each year we get more data which destroys the nonsense of people like the source. the xbow fight is just like the fight to allow CCW licenses-every time another state allowed it, sarah brady's myth took another beating.


----------



## thesource

awshucks said:


> Actually, Source, the breakdown on crossbows being legal is as follows:
> 
> Illegal: 3 states [NY, OR, NV]
> Allowed archery 11 states
> Allowed Handi-capped 27 states
> Allowed gun season 13 states
> Allowed cb season: 1 state
> Allowed by age: 2 states
> 
> There is of course some overlap, and it is an ever changing [upward] list.
> I did not count NY in handi-capped due to bs breath tube/iron lung provision.



I'll assume that you are not trying to deceive, here.

Let us clarify those states that allow xbow in Archery.

Only 7 allow in ALL of archery, right? OH, WY, AR, VA, TN, GA, AL

A couple more in a part of early archery - KY, MD, PA (although they allow MZ, too, so I don't think you could consider that archery season)

A couple allow LATE archery - that's not really the same issue, now is it?

Which state has its OWN crossbow season?

Anyway, its interesting to note that more states feel they belong with guns than with bows....Even I don't agree with that.


Only 7 out of 50 .... that means 43 have it right!:darkbeer:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I'll assume that you are not trying to deceive, here.
> 
> Let us clarify those states that allow xbow in Archery.
> 
> Only 7 allow in ALL of archery, right? OH, WY, AR, VA, TN, GA, AL
> 
> A couple more in a part of early archery - KY, MD, PA (although they allow MZ, too, so I don't think you could consider that archery season)
> 
> A couple allow LATE archery - that's not really the same issue, now is it?
> 
> Which state has its OWN crossbow season?
> 
> Anyway, its interesting to note that more states feel they belong with guns than with bows....Even I don't agree with that.
> 
> 
> Only 7 out of 50 .... that means 43 have it right!:darkbeer:


nah it means that stupidity and disinformation has permeated many areas of America but slowly the benighted fog is waning and the light is shining through:wink:


----------



## Free Range

Kind of reminds me of the lady who insisted her son was the only one in-step in the marching band.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Kind of reminds me of the lady who insisted her son was the only one in-step in the marching band.



You sound like ROme telling Gallileo that he was a heretic for suggesting that the earth revolves around the sun. Your side is relying on medieval myths and more modern lies


----------



## awshucks

Source: I went thru the list, state by state and listed how they stood. It's fairly complicated, all sorts of permutations and combinations, here's the site, crunch em how ever you want, they're legal in one form or another in 47 states. http://crossbowhunting.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=63


----------



## LoweBow

aceoky said:


> Ya know, whenever I hear this "cheating" or "lazy" foolish BS I can't help but notice you'll never hear gun hunters talking like that about other gun hunters.....
> 
> When was the last time anyone heard a hunter say " Well, I choose a 30/30, so I DESERVE more time than Bob who uses a 7mm Mag".....they DON"T each is content with their choice of weapon and has no problem with what someone else is using.........ONLY "bowhunters" (and only a very few at that) seem to be overly concerned with what archery weapon another hunter *chooses* to use...........strange.......yet very "telling" dontcha think.........:lalala: :amen:



Ace...
One KDFWR Commissioner did just that recently.
He made the argument that a 7mm. Mag was NOT a large enough cartridge to harvest elk with.... 
He then went on to convince the commission that handguns should not be used to hunt elk. :darkbeer: 

when asked about .454, .500 , others.....
or T/C in .444 marlin, 45-70 etc...he stated it was still a pistol and should not be used... 

Consitancy at it's best. 
Talk about decreasing opportunity...?


----------



## aceoky

NOT even close to the same thing Mike; 

YOU and the UBK state that "bowhunters" deserve MORE time because you choose to use a "bow", (and some of you don't think a cb "fits" into that)....

Now I could somewhat understand that stance IF all these "bowhunters" were using self bows.....but since they're not , it's a moot point.....most are using compounds with 85%(or more let off), thus NO good reason to exclude the cb from archery season, and NO way to provide any real proof it's deserved..... it's "funny" the same feeble attempts were once made to exclude the compound bow from archery, but most now know there would be NO archery season in most states had that not been allowed to happen, yet some still can't see why the cb is good for archery (and it's future) even though it IS the exact same thing and the same reasons exist.........

MOST people are aware that "time" is a limiting factor for most people, allowing them to use an archery weapon during archery season that doesn't require as much "time investment" makes GOOD sense........period

ALL the data proves this to be a fact..........nothing disproves it, 

YOU simply will NOT hear other gun hunters concerned with what another gun hunter chooses to use, and YOU won't hear one saying he "deserves more hunting time" because he/she CHOOSES to use a shorter range weapon either(some gun hunters use BP during modern gun by CHOICE...others the shorter range 30/30...they don't however feel "entitled" ONLY some few "bowhunters" use that lame excuse to exclude other hunters and potential archery hunters from archery season......to keep other hunters OUT of the season........NO other reason ......


----------



## thesource

aceoky said:


> most are using compounds with 85%(or more let off)



ANOTHER crossbow misrepresentation.

The vast majority of all compounds have 80% or less letoff. 

Shame on you.


----------



## LoweBow

aceoky said:


> NOT even close to the same thing Mike;
> 
> YOU and the UBK state that "bowhunters" deserve MORE time because you choose to use a "bow", (and some of you don't think a cb "fits" into that)....
> LIE....show me where.
> Now I could somewhat understand that stance IF all these "bowhunters" were using self bows.....but since they're not , it's a moot point.....most are using compounds with 85%(or more let off), thus NO good reason to exclude the cb from archery season, and NO way to provide any real proof it's deserved..... it's "funny" the same feeble attempts were once made to exclude the compound bow from archery, but most now know there would be NO archery season in most states had that not been allowed to happen, yet some still can't see why the cb is good for archery (and it's future) even though it IS the exact same thing and the same reasons exist.........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Blah Blah Blah.....same drivel you've spewed for a year now. You've yet to step to the plate and actually do anything other than sit behind a keyboard and type your "facts" I find your "facts" to be far from that. Just like the lies about how the LKS supported full expansion. Never did....The outcome of the vote you and yours put in front of the LKS at the convention....why not share it's outcome w/ the readers....Oh..*you* didn't show up at the Convention to support it...Everyone else must have stayed home too...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MOST people are aware that "time" is a limiting factor for most people, allowing them to use an archery weapon during archery season that doesn't require as much "time investment" makes GOOD sense........period
> 
> ALL the data proves this to be a fact..........nothing disproves it,
> 
> YOU simply will NOT hear other gun hunters concerned with what another gun hunter chooses to use, and YOU won't hear one saying he "deserves more hunting time" because he/she CHOOSES to use a shorter range weapon either(some gun hunters use BP during modern gun by CHOICE...others the shorter range 30/30...they don't however feel "entitled" ONLY some few "bowhunters" use that lame excuse to exclude other hunters and potential archery hunters from archery season......to keep other hunters OUT of the season........NO other reason ......
> COLOR="blue"]So you're saying that MuzzleLoaders don't deserve their own season that is now structure for them? That gun hunters should be able to hunt w/ them or they are trying to exclude others from opportunity? Guns are guns by your own comparison...
> [/COLOR]


So you're saying that MuzzleLoaders don't deserve their own season that is now structure for them? Guns are guns by your own comparison...
You've settled your own argument once again...

The season as structured is here for a long time. Get over it. Move on. Next issue. 

Your clans true colors showed at the LKS Convention. Whiners that weren't happy w/ an extended season. The patrons of the convention saw through the smoke and voted for no further expansion.







This has been relayed to the appropriate lawmakers and they will back this decision. Don't believe me.....make the calls. Ask the questions. You guys went "all in" and your bluff was called. You're out of chips. Time to get a new game and let this horse be burried. Show us all that you can do something constructive to help KY's hunters and fishermen.....Or are you just a one issue savior. 
It's time to move on.


----------



## Jim C

Looks like another "we got ours screw the other guys" attitude from LowBow


----------



## aceoky

Mike first, *I* don't have to show YOU anything, we ALL know what YOU've stated many times, call it a lie, all you want to, won't change anything, YOU talk about ML season NOW, but YOU and the UBK fought against them.....how about YOU explaining that? (especially since YOU seem to embrace it NOW...(after it's done that is)......


I'm not surprised YOU don't like "my facts" because they ARE facts and prove the REAL reasons for YOU doing what was done....... 

NO I wasn't at the LKS convention, most KNOW I was instead in SC watching my son-in-law graduate the US Navy "A school" second in his class, otherwise I WOULD have been there......

YOU have "some nerve" to mention "whiners", Let's "recap" shall we???

The expansion WAS law, "who" was the "whiners" back then??

OH Yeah, the UBK (And YOU) led that "fight" and were no doubt the "big whiners" on the block........

YOU said " The season as structured is here for a long time. Get over it. Move on. Next issue. "

Define "long time".........guess we'll see won't we ALL.....


YOU have once again made claims that are not true, NOW you've called me a "liar" , and tried to get anyone to think this is the first and only issue, I've been involved with, good tactics, I'm certain they will only help YOU, especially as an officer of the LKS...........REAL GOOD MOVE.......

NO I don't believe "it", as far as the lawmakers go, I happen to believe that being lied to by your side, didn't harm US at all.........again guess we'll see won't we???


----------



## Free Range

> but most now know there would be NO archery season in most states had that not been allowed to happen,


ACE? Your opinion again? Most that I know, know there “would” be a bow season, and it would probably be much better off without the compound, my opinion. 



> ALL the data proves this to be a fact..........nothing disproves it,


Wrong, all your opinions might prove it, to you, and a few others, but no facts prove this, not even close. 



> YOU simply will NOT hear other gun hunters concerned with what another gun hunter chooses to use, and YOU won't hear one saying he "deserves more hunting time" because he/she CHOOSES to use a shorter range weapon either(some gun hunters use BP during modern gun by CHOICE...others the shorter range 30/30...they don't however feel "entitled" ONLY some few "bowhunters" use that lame excuse to exclude other hunters and potential archery hunters from archery season......to keep other hunters OUT of the season........NO other reason ......


Then why do we have a muzzle loader season in all (I think) states?? Hmmm maybe because some gun hunters thought they deserved (and rightly so) a different season?


----------



## aceoky

Jim C said:


> Looks like another "we got ours screw the other guys" attitude from LowBow



YEP; nothing "new" and notice how HE "brags" about already making sure the lawmakers are aware of the bs he's posting (the LKS WAS in favor of expansion, WE have the records which prove that)........THEY don't like that fact, so they call facts "not facts" but continue to notice they have NOTHING to disprove them with.......just unfounded accusations.......


----------



## LoweBow

Jim C said:


> Looks like another "we got ours screw the other guys" attitude from LowBow


Too bad you know nothing Jim.
I've been in this for a compromise since the initial onset of this over a year ago. I worked w/ the last KDFWR Commissionor as well as this one to get just that. Think what you want as you are just another outsider looking in and will never have any say so as to what Ky does or doesn't do.
I however AM and WILL BE involved for a long time to come.


----------



## aceoky

AS I also have been Mike,and I also intend to be for a very, very long time to come as well.......would have rather you hadn't made it personal, but it is what it is NOW.......


----------



## LoweBow

aceoky said:


> YEP; nothing "new" and notice how HE "brags" about already making sure the lawmakers *(Can't help talking at the family gatherings)*are aware of the bs he's posting (the LKS WAS in favor of expansion, WE have the records which prove that)........THEY don't like that fact, so they call facts "not facts" but continue to notice they have NOTHING to disprove them with.......just unfounded accusations.......



So when the LKS delegation voted 12 in favor of full expansion to the reamaining 130 against...this shows that they are for it? What am I missing. OH.. I know....You want to twist the "facts" to show that some of the LKS Federations Directors went out on their own and didn't represent their constituants and said they were for expansion. The 3rds did just that. Got his butt unseated for it too.  Or was it the Directors that never asked their federations to vote on it and just said their people supported it? FACT that both of these happened. 
The LKS position was cemented w/ the defeat of your resolution. FACT:cocktail: :cocktail:


----------



## LoweBow

aceoky said:


> AS I also have been Mike,and I also intend to be for a very, very long time to come as well.......would have rather you hadn't made it personal, but it is what it is NOW.......


Who made it personal?
Twisting things again aren't we?



aceoky said:


> YOU and the UBK state that "bowhunters" deserve MORE time because you choose to use a "bow", (and some of you don't think a cb "fits" into that)....:


You know I have never said such a thing and have always contended that I personally believed a longer season was needed for crossbow use. You twisted the facts and say that "I" say things that I did not.

I find your indisputable fact....very disputable.


----------



## aceoky

NOT hardly Mike, I know better, and with your newly aquired position, I'd think you'd be a bit more careful, or is it already gone to your head???


----------



## LoweBow

aceoky said:


> NOT hardly Mike, I know better, and with your newly aquired position, I'd think you'd be a bit more careful, or is it already gone to your head???


Absurd


----------



## JavaMan

it's absurd argueing about how someone wants to participate in an individual recreational sport especially when that choice does not compromise your enjoyment.

JavaMan


----------



## Free Range

Poor Ace every time someone comes on here from KY, they just prove what we have known along. :darkbeer:


----------



## Free Range

> it's absurd argueing about how someone wants to participate in an individual recreational sport especially when that choice does not compromise your enjoyment.


Oh but it does Doug, it does.


----------



## JavaMan

Free Range

You are the second person to suggest I am someone I am not.

How exactly does it compromise your enjoyment?

I fail to see how if I choose to bowhunt one day with a PSE, the next day with a Black Widow, the next day with a TenPoint it makes any difference to YOU.

JavaMan


----------



## aceoky

HEY LOWEBOW........

BR 499 /HC 13
A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION urging an extension of the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey.

WHEREAS, the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources has studied extensively the issue of extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey; and

WHEREAS, the department has proposed extending the two crossbow seasons from the historic ten-day framework to coincide with the regular archery season; and

WHEREAS, there is a recognized need to increase the harvest of whitetail deer in a large portion of the state; and

WHEREAS, extending the crossbow-hunting season would not adversely endanger the wild turkey population in the state; and

WHEREAS, a Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources survey found that more than half of respondents surveyed support expansion of the deer and turkey crossbow-hunting seasons; and

WHEREAS, organizations like the Crossbow Advisory Panel and the *League of Kentucky Sportsmen deserve recognition for their support and active involvement *in this important issue;

NOW, THEREFORE,

Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the Senate concurring therein:


Section 1. The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky urges the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission and the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources to proceed with extending the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and turkey.
Section 2. Copies of this Resolution shall be transmitted to Mr. Jon Gassett, commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, and to each member of the Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Commission.

________________________________________________________

THAT BILL (drafted by Mr. Meeks), says the LKS WAS in support OF the expansion........

First YOU say "they're" on "your side", but yet you say this is a "LIE"......I'll bet they will ALL love to see this one! :cocktail:


----------



## JavaMan

Ace

Good post and shows the ignorance of the anti crossbow side. When one side argues with facts and the other side argues with emotion it's a no contest.

I see crossbows going into all archery seasons and so do those who oppose it.

tough isn't it?

JavaMan


----------



## aceoky

LoweBow said:


> Who made it personal?
> Twisting things again aren't we?
> 
> YOU did, when you A.) called me a liar, just now, accused me(falsely of twisting things again) WE shall soon see how "wise" that was.....
> 
> 
> 
> You know I have never said such a thing and have always contended that I personally believed a longer season was needed for crossbow use. You twisted the facts and say that "I" say things that I did not.
> 
> I find your indisputable fact....very disputable.


More to come......:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

Looks like the UBK is at it again 

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

While checking sites today I ran across a post on Bowsite in the Kentucky forum that looks to me like *the UBK is attempting to protest the new survey on crossbow use without it ever being taken.*

The latest from my perspective is they want people to call the Ky Fish & Game and protest the spending of the money to do the survey. The post even list a 800 number 1-800-858-1549 from my understanding this is the toll free number to the main switchboard at the Fish & Game headquarters.

First they say the old survey was not good enough, now they try to prevent a new survey from being taken. 

*Looks like the UBK is afraid of what the new survey will show and will resort to any measure to prevent the sportsmen and sportswomen of Kentucky the final say in if crossbows will be allowed in the regular archery season*.

http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17865

NOW everyone in KY KNOWS that YOU are THE Public Voice of the UBK.......guess this proves nothing either???  

VERY interesting thread, including an UBK officer saying (Walt K) "in effect" IF the majority want expansion then "so be it", wonder WHY that WAS NOT the "end" then?????


----------



## LoweBow

aceoky said:


> HEY LOWEBOW........
> 
> 
> WHEREAS, organizations like the Crossbow Advisory Panel and the *League of Kentucky Sportsmen deserve recognition for their support and active involvement *in this important issue;
> 
> 
> First YOU say "they're" on "your side", but yet you say this is a "LIE"......I'll bet they will ALL love to see this one! :cocktail:


Since I sat on said advisory panel I'll give you 1st hand information.....The panel was inconclusive and did not support either. FACT

And you will need to show me where the LKS ever said this in writing....If this is supposed to be your "Proof" I fail to see how someone thanking a group for their "support and active involvement" . means this?

As this House Resolution so that you bring out so clearly shows just one more clear twist of the "facts" that you have stated many times. 
This HR was developed LONG before the bowhunters decided to ever go outside of the Commission and straight to the Legislature. YOU and your side however did just that....then cried foul when the Bowhunters trumped you w/ the SB 211 Bill. Backfired on you didn't it? You should count your blessings I helped talk sence into many that wanted to let that bill run or you'd be crying w/ no expansion at all and it'd be set in LAW and not Regulation. 

I thought you were thru w/ this thread anyways...Oh...you twisted that one too. ukey: LOL
You're too intertaining and easily riled..LOL HA!


----------



## ballard

Aceoky said:


> THAT BILL (drafted by Mr. Meeks), says the LKS WAS in support OF the expansion........


You sure about that Ace? You might want to re-read it, b/c you seem to be reading a heckuva lot more into it than what it actually there. All I'm reading is some praise for the LKS supporting the Dept on "this important issue". 

In fact, all I see is: "WHEREAS, organizations like the Crossbow Advisory Panel and the League of Kentucky Sportsmen deserve recognition for their support and active involvement in this important issue."

Interesting angle, Ace. Now, you're telling people that the LKS representatives are wrong on the LKS's position and that a non-member (namely one Rep. Meeks) knows more about the LKS than the LKS's members do? By the way, have you ever been to any LKS event or Federation meeting? 

As an aside, would you care to wager that somebody other than Rep. Meeks actually drafted this resolution? 



JavaMan said:


> Ace
> 
> Good post and shows the ignorance of the anti crossbow side. When one side argues with facts and the other side argues with emotion it's a no contest.
> 
> I see crossbows going into all archery seasons and so do those who oppose it.
> 
> tough isn't it?
> 
> JavaMan


Ummm. . . .sorry to throw a monkey wrench in your love fest. You might want to know what you're talking about and read things a little bit more closely before spouting off about "ignorance" and the like.


----------



## aceoky

UBK trying to reverse the new xbow ruling. 

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

Ok this is important. I know that things are just now beginning to cool down and the anti-xbow guys are making nice. But I just found out this is a smoke screen. I just received a PM and an e-mail informing me that the UBK is working overtime behind the scenes (read covert) to get the new xbow rule changed. Please don't allow an organization that is only 500 strong sway the commissioner into a special meeting or whatever they have in mind.
Call your commissioner and ask him to stand by the new rule allowing xbows during archery season. Let's do this in a respectful manner. Guys this ain't over!


http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/showthread.php?t=13870

Another good thread showing what the UBK actually did to "circumvent the process"......:cocktail:


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> UBK trying to reverse the new xbow ruling.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Ok this is important. I know that things are just now beginning to cool down and the anti-xbow guys are making nice. But I just found out this is a smoke screen. I just received a PM and an e-mail informing me that the UBK is working overtime behind the scenes (read covert) to get the new xbow rule changed. Please don't allow an organization that is only 500 strong sway the commissioner into a special meeting or whatever they have in mind.
> Call your commissioner and ask him to stand by the new rule allowing xbows during archery season. Let's do this in a respectful manner. Guys this ain't over!
> 
> 
> http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/showthread.php?t=13870
> 
> Another good thread showing what the UBK actually did to "circumvent the process"......:cocktail:



Oh my goodness!!!!! UNCLE, UNCLE, UNCLE. Ace finally uncovered the true smoking gun in this matter.

Gwhillikerz (a UCBK member and general xbow proponent) posts on March 8, 2005 states that he receives an e-mail AND a PM from some unknown individual telling him that UBK is working overtime to overturn the decision to expand the xbow season. Hmmmm. . . . compelling.


----------



## aceoky

LoweBow said:


> Since I sat on said advisory panel I'll give you 1st hand information.....The panel was inconclusive and did not support either. FACT
> 
> That is true, since Somer would NOT try to "work this out"......I won't mention your name in that though
> 
> And you will need to show me where the LKS ever said this in writing....If this is supposed to be your "Proof" I fail to see how someone thanking a group for their "support and active involvement" . means this?
> 
> NOT that hard to find IF you want to know..
> 
> As this House Resolution so that you bring out so clearly shows just one more clear twist of the "facts" that you have stated many times.
> This HR was developed LONG before the bowhunters decided to ever go outside of the Commission and straight to the Legislature.
> 
> That is 100% FALSE and YOU know it, I can easily show where YOU talked about going to them(AND DID) in March 2005 WAS that before this, NO wasn't.........you accuse me of twisting, then do it way too obvious.....
> 
> 
> 
> YOU and your side however did just that....then cried foul when the Bowhunters trumped you w/ the SB 211 Bill. Backfired on you didn't it?
> 
> NOPE and WE didn't have anything to do with HCR 13, please prove otherwise (should be fun)
> 
> 
> You should count your blessings I helped talk sence into many that wanted to let that bill run or you'd be crying w/ no expansion at all and it'd be set in LAW and not Regulation.
> 
> it had a LONG way to go (again) before THAT actually happened and (yet again) the Gov would NOT have ever signed it, period
> 
> I thought you were thru w/ this thread anyways...Oh...you twisted that one too. ukey: LOL
> You're too intertaining and easily riled..LOL HA!


Glad you think so.....


----------



## aceoky

Ballard that's "funny" , but the fact remains, that WAS what was going on (and though posted on a public forum was NEVER denied).......that pretty much settles it for most.......


----------



## aceoky

UBK letter attempt...........(this is ONLY one of such letters btw)


Immediate Action Needed!!!

A House Resolution (HCR-B) urging an extension of the crossbow-hunting season for whitetail deer and wild turkey has been presented by 47th District Representative Reginald Meeks. This resolution can be viewed at the following website.

http://www.1rc.ky.gov/record/06RS/HC13.htm

This resolution was filed 3 days before the KDFWR Commission voted to expand the crossbow season to encompass the entire archery season.

THAT is 100% FALSE, the Dept Commision had voted in March 2005 to do exactly THAT........but don't let the FACTS get in the way of anything.....



Inside this resolution it states "Whereas, organizations like the Crossbow Advisory Panel and the League of Kentucky Sportsmen deserve recognition for their support and active involvement in this important issue" The LKS nor Crossbow Advisory Panel supported this expansion.

It is imperative that immediate action be taken to stop this resolution!
Do not wait! Upon receiving this notice take I-minute to do the following:

1. Call 1-800-372-7181.

2. Give your name and appropriate information when asked.

3. Ask that a "green slip" be delivered to your ALL Senators and Representatives simply stating "NO" for House Resolution HCR-13.

4. You're done! Easy as that!
A "green slip" will be left for each and every Legislator sitting at the 2006 session.

Also included in the Hot-Mailer is a pre-written letter to be sent to your Legislators.

This letter is designed to make it easy to let your Legislators know our desire to keep a "bow only" hunting season. Please take the time to add your own personal comments, sign, date, and mail this to your State Senator and Representative.

Thank you for your diligence in helping keep some sort of "bow only" season UBK Board. 


LETTER:

As a sportsman in Kentucky, I urge you to take action that would preserve a bow only season in Kentucky. 

The proposed crossbow season expansion would eliminate *the bow only season*.

MORE BS! Anyone could still use their bow of choice......at anytime during the season.....

I understand the desire to create more opportunity for sportsmen in Kentucky, but I know it could
be done without *taking opportunity away from others. *

I'm especially concern about the 42% of the students in the National Archery in the School Programs that have expressed interest in bowhunting not having the incentive to go bowhunting if there is no bow only season. I implore you to help keep a BOW ONLY season in Kentucky.


http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/showthread.php?t=23904
-----------------------------------------------------------------

NOTHING quite like a "form letter" pre-written for others to "get YOUR point out" is there???.........

NOTHING was to ever be "taken away from others" more misinformation, and NOTHING was ever done to jepordize the Archery in the Schools Program either, MORE opportunity was and IS our goal, for ALL .......NOT only for UBK members.........ALL KY hunters.........

Now Mike YOU tell ME that YOU had nothing to do with this letter.......which "backs up" pretty well what I posted.......


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Oh my goodness!!!!! UNCLE, UNCLE, UNCLE. Ace finally uncovered the true smoking gun in this matter.
> 
> Gwhillikerz (a UCBK member and general xbow proponent) posts on March 8, 2005 states that he receives an e-mail AND a PM from some unknown individual telling him that UBK is working overtime to overturn the decision to expand the xbow season. Hmmmm. . . . compelling.


NOR was this post denied (please note the bolded part, just "for you"):cocktail: From the same thread NEXT post.,.......

_______________________________________________________________________

It's my understanding that the push is to BYPASS the Commission and go over their head to the Gov and Legislature or *Mr. Host of Commerce.*

EXACTLY what the UBK (and others) DID in fact do, yet Mike just *tried * to say WE did it first, knowing the UBK did the first end run and WE had nothing to do with HCR 13 (and that *I* fought against it in PUBLIC for the same reasons I fought sb 211.....even though HCR 13 WAS pro-crossbow expansion) the TRUTH and FACTS won't support the utter BS....period




Hard to imagine a group like the UBK who has helped with Commission decisions many times now showing disrespect by doing an end run around them. 

Folks, wheather you like the change or not, the Commission process has been in place for many years, Tried and tested, it's better than using what some other states use. To have the legilatur and Gov decide are deer seasons is asking for serious trouble. for example, three young men died this week from a car wreck caused by a deer. 

Let's say the legislature decides there are too many deer in that area and has a spring or summer deer reduction slaughter. Think hard before you make those calls being urged by the bow group and the Louisville Lip on WHAS 84.

*If someone in an official position finds any untruth in this post and can send me where my info is wrong, I'll be more than happy to delete this post.*


----------



## aceoky

LoweBow said:


> Since I sat on said advisory panel I'll give you 1st hand information.....The panel was inconclusive and did not support either. FACT
> 
> And you will need to show me where the LKS ever said this in writing....If this is supposed to be your "Proof" I fail to see how someone thanking a group for their "support and active involvement" . means this?
> 
> 
> Mike show us ALL that it means OPPOSED , can YOU do that??? YOU claim to have them(the legislature on YOUR side then state in Public their information is NOT correct............great move and thanks)
> 
> As this House Resolution so that you bring out so clearly shows just one more clear twist of the "facts" that you have stated many times.
> This HR was developed LONG before the bowhunters decided to ever go outside of the Commission and straight to the Legislature. YOU and your side however did just that....then cried foul when the Bowhunters trumped you w/ the SB 211 Bill. Backfired on you didn't it? You should count your blessings I helped talk sence into many that wanted to let that bill run or you'd be crying w/ no expansion at all and it'd be set in LAW and not Regulation.
> 
> I thought you were thru w/ this thread anyways...Oh...you twisted that one too. ukey: LOL
> You're too intertaining and easily riled..LOL HA!


So which is it Mike, Are they on your side OR are they not telling the truth (Mr. Meeks wasn't alone in doing this you do know that ?).....YOU can't have it both ways........


----------



## aceoky

SINCE YOU asked Lowebow........

#3 01-31-2006, 11:18 PM 
WBBP 
10 Pointer Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,799 



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

Wildman, DJ is showing us a message that the UBK is distributing to its members. Nothing wrong with the letter,* except the comment that "the LKS did not support the expansion" is pure misinformation.*


In fact the *LKS Board voted to support the Department's decision to expand the cross bow season into the full archery season. *K

http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/showthread.php?t=23904

.........is that "in writing" enough for YOU Mike??? (HE has the minutes to "back it up" btw which YOU should know)


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> Ballard that's "funny" , but the fact remains, that WAS what was going on (and though posted on a public forum was NEVER denied).......that pretty much settles it for most.......


Outstanding. That would be identical to me telling you that you're an "ignoramus" since somebody posted it on kyhunting.com and you NEVER denied it. I guess that your failure to deny would "pretty much settle it for most.. . . ."


----------



## aceoky

NO Ballard, first NO one takes YOU seriously there.... (LMAO) and secondly there is a huge difference in one person and an org like the UBK, WE all know it was in fact true, had they tried to dispute it they would have been proven liars.....

Also the FACT that Tom C. ASKED for someone to disprove it (even by PM) and he'd delete his post on the information he'd gotten.....NO one did......WE all know why......since we all now know in fact that is exactly what was done.....


----------



## Free Range

> As a sportsman in Kentucky, I urge you to take action that would preserve a bow only season in Kentucky.
> 
> The proposed crossbow season expansion would eliminate the bow only season.
> 
> MORE BS! Anyone could still use their bow of choice......at anytime during the season.....


More spin by the Acemister, it said bow only, and if you let in another weapon it no longer is bow only. Gee Ace you are really getting bad at this telling the truth thing. 



> Outstanding. That would be identical to me telling you that you're an "ignoramus" since somebody posted it on kyhunting.com and you NEVER denied it. I guess that your failure to deny would "pretty much settle it for most.. . . ."


Settles it for me, lol


----------



## aceoky

I'm NOT going to apologize to anyone for fighting for what the vast majority of Ky hunters said they want.........NOT gonna happen, nor for posting exactly what DID in fact take place in KY over the past 18 months or so.......

I didn't do either one to be "liked" or "popular" , I did it because *I* believe it to be the right thing to do.......personal insults won't change any of that, nor will misinformation.........

I posted a "few things" in a short time, just imagine what I could (and can) post IF given a bit more motivation.......

Mike in his "newly aquired position" RATHER than trying to "mend fences" has NO doubt resorted to "we won" attitude, NOT imho the "best road to take" (and by no way or means the "high road" he's always Vowed to take)........

NOT a "wise" or "prudent" move, much less from a man of his new position to take , much less with another LKS member........

HE(Mike) stated this "season" is what will be for a long time.........NOW we'll have to see about all of that won't we.........

I was rather happy and ready to move on........having once again been handed the "we won" ........."deal with it" as everyone here can easily read, I think I made a mistake.......

....NOW I have to REALLY think about settling, against the majority's wishes......(and I don't care what anyone says about what is "what" on the legislature, trust me when I say, I'm NOT new to any of this, and am well aware things can easily change "overnight" and often do)......BTW I'm "happy" for him he has relatives there in Frankfort (will make beating him that much BETTER) ........I honestly didn't know "lil ole me" could get to him so easily (yet he says "i'm easy" LMAO) guess the truth on the UBK's tactics are something HE would rather have NOT mentioned, OH well, they shouldn't have done them IF they were concerned about the "fallout"......I NEVER made it any secret, that I would make sure everyone who cared found out, I meant it then, and I still do.......it's only starting Mike.......get used to the truth being known by so many WE'll see how the majority feel about YOU and the UBK and the expansion in say a few short years.........and myself........shall we......YOU called me a "liar" good move for a man in your position.......btw I'm saving that for future use.........hehee

Like I said, good move.......so please keep insulting and "rubbing it in" for ALL of us........if you think that to be wise............so be it......


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> NO Ballard, first NO one takes YOU seriously there.... (LMAO) and secondly there is a huge difference in one person and an org like the UBK, WE all know it was in fact true, had they tried to dispute it they would have been proven liars.....
> 
> Also the FACT that Tom C. ASKED for someone to disprove it (even by PM) and he'd delete his post on the information he'd gotten.....NO one did......WE all know why......since we all now know in fact that is exactly what was done.....


Easy there, Ace. 

ATTENTION. . . . ATTENTION. . . .ATTENTION. . . .

Please note that my "Ignoramus" post regarding Aceoky was just a hypothetical and than no one actually called him an "ignoramus". 

Go about your business. Nothing to see here. . . . . 

Didn't mean to stir the slumbering giant, Ace. No need to get your panties in a bunch there, big feller!!!:RockOn:


----------



## aceoky

Poor Free Range, with every single post he looks yet more foolish (IF that's even possible)......where IS YOUR data and facts to support YOUR stance??? without it.........your opinion counts for nought in any of this........once again.......YOU "think" you're making points, but are not......YOU have yet to provide any substance to any of this (but then again it REALLY doesn't affect/effect YOU so why would you, other than to cast your usual "opinions" of which YOU can't even support with fact one)

YOU have continued to lose credibility and most everything else, with your tactics......enjoy the "laugh" Tim, things are not what they "seem"(hardly ever are btw)........bet on that .......


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Easy there, Ace.
> 
> ATTENTION. . . . ATTENTION. . . .ATTENTION. . . .
> 
> Please note that my "Ignoramus" post regarding Aceoky was just a hypothetical and than no one actually called him an "ignoramus".
> 
> Go about your business. Nothing to see here. . . . .
> 
> Didn't mean to stir the slumbering giant, Ace. No need to get your panties in a bunch there, big feller!!!:RockOn:



OK .....

THAT is funny, (even coming from you) :RockOn: :RockOn: (just "messing with you Ballard" it WAS funny).....

BTW I wasn't even refferring to you......


----------



## aceoky

Just so everyone knows, IF you read those threads I posted "Ballard" goes by "buckfever" over there, some very interesting points he made "back in the day" even on the survey.......NICE in fact.........lmao


----------



## Jim C

LoweBow said:


> Too bad you know nothing Jim.
> I've been in this for a compromise since the initial onset of this over a year ago. I worked w/ the last KDFWR Commissionor as well as this one to get just that. Think what you want as you are just another outsider looking in and will never have any say so as to what Ky does or doesn't do.
> I however AM and WILL BE involved for a long time to come.


I guess you are ignorant of the issues I post on. I post on archery and philosophy, not numbers in KY, not how selfish certain bowhunters are. I don't argue with numbers or which group in KY stands for what. I do know what motivates opposition to crossbows and I know that far better than you could ever dream of


----------



## Jim C

JavaMan said:


> it's absurd argueing about how someone wants to participate in an individual recreational sport especially when that choice does not compromise your enjoyment.
> 
> JavaMan



That's the argument these people can never deal with


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> Just so everyone knows, IF you read those threads I posted "Ballard" goes by "buckfever" over there, some very interesting points he made "back in the day" even on the survey.......NICE in fact.........lmao


Ace - Certain members of the Crossbow Advisory Panel wanted to participate in the drafting of the survey questions and actually asked to see the Survey BEFORE it was submitted to Cornell for administration. This request was ignored. 

Wonder why that happened? :wink: 

We've considered your evidence. Here's your trophy:

:second:


----------



## aceoky

http://www.kentuckyhunting.net/forums/showthread.php?t=17865&page=2


#15 08-17-2005, 12:20 PM 
buckfever 
12 Pointer Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prospect, Ky, USA.
Posts: 2,068 



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

I was not a UBK member and was one of those that spoke out against crossbows.

*I believe that its absolutely critical to perform a survey to determine where sportsmen stand on this issue.* 

NOW Ballard YOU want to "cast doubt" on a survey, that I have NOW proven you supported.......that's "great"



So long as the methods and data are reliable (meaning that questions are not intentionally designed to reach a predetermined result), and the data shows that the sportsmen are for it, then so be it.


OH it DID do that, and more, yet YOU fought it even with SB 211......that's again "GREAT" yet let's worry about my "panties" shall we 

I'm not sure why it's necessary to spend $50,000 (I know that accurate surveys can be performed for less) or to contract it out to an expensive, Ivy League school (any state school or private polling company would provide the necessary data), but the KDFWR, not UBK, decides how taxpayers dollars are spent. 

I WILL NOW question the "reasoning" here, the first survey was "not valid" because some said the KDFWR had "undo influence" and could "pre-determine the outcome" THIS idea would have given YOU that same avenue once again.....

WBBP - You're absolutely wrong to lay all the blame at the feet of those opposed to this year's expansive crossbow season for any lack of compromise. When the so-called "compromise" of Nov. 1 was originally floated, I listened to tapes of Hensley and Gassett specifically stating that they would use this compromise as a springboard to implement the exact same fully expansive season in 2006 (not to mention Hensley's promise to exact retribution against those involved). In other words, "Get 'em to play ball this year, and we'll stick it to 'em next year." This type of attitude isn't conducive to garnering trust and support. Who in the hell would agree to work with others who aren't interested in working with them? Moreover, Gassett didn't say he was looking for a compromise. He said it was an all or nothing proposition. If the Nov. 1 date wasn't agreed, then the crossbow season would start Sept. 3rd.

Second, the survey wasn't the only issue raised, but that really is immaterial now.

Both sides should be working with KDFWR to find a solution. 

Agreed, I have said that exactly several times in fact.


If spending $50,000 seems to be a waste, how about finding an alternative that people can live with? Possibly expand the crossbow season to have it open on a predetermined date running through the end of bowseason. 

Guess that changed for you as well???



Give that a chance to sink in for a few years (especially for turkeys) and review the data to see whether there's any harm to the resources. 

WE offered to take turkey OUT (and the Dept agreed.....???


If there's no evidence that crossbows will harm anything, then let the crossbow season rip. And it just isn't the bowhunters who stand to lose (although I'm not one who is concerned about losing the bowhunting tradition to crossbows) or those concerned about the resources. The crossbowers might also lose. Suppose the survey comes back and says that people are opposed to expanding the crossbow season. 

In retrospect NOT a good idea to mention, even though I know you hate my being correct on what that one or 1,000 more would say , simply because the majority of Ky hunters ARE gun hunters and dont' ahve any reason to oppose the cb expansion


The small minority that actually use a crossbow will never have a future voice if that happens. 

Well, now , HOW things have changed!!! 

NO surpise it was a "small minority" WHO would spend the $$ to ONLY be allowed to use a cb for 10 days??? Big deal, and NO point!! NOW things are already changing AS we said they would.............and guess what? Had YOU guys who said you'd take the survey results kept your word, they'd had a "real chance" to use one IF they choose......"win-win" like I've always said


----------



## aceoky

NOW this ONE I LOVE.........Ballard, YOU like to state I don't know what I'm talking about, here is one for YOU......

Buckfever-Your out of the loop here. The major players were asked to try and work out a solution and submit workable plans so that discussion could take place on a possible compromise, and to be able to head off spending the money mentioned.

Nobody except the crossbow guys wanted anything to do with it. 

Now, hopefully, those that wanted a survey will get it, regardless of the cost. We'll know Friday. (same thread btw) :tongue: :cocktail:


----------



## ballard

See Ace, imagine how much time, expense and anguish could have been saved if UCBK had simply put me in charge on day one. 

As I'm sure you can read, I've never had any problems with expanding the xbow season. I've always had a big problem with total expansion and the manner in which it was handled. 

I'm absolutely certain that if this total expansion "agenda" wasn't the driver, the xbowers would've enjoyed a better season than what they ended up with.


----------



## aceoky

AND Ballard this one is "priceless" another Ky lawyer (Sky btw) letting YOU know the price wasn't so bad after all....

The price tag for that survey is not out of line. Surveys are like anything else--you get what you pay for. And Cornell's considered one of the best. Even a quick political poll is a high dollar item--that's why in the past when I've been asked to poll members of the N***, my response was invariably to ask the person making the demand to foot the bill.

Yep "motivate me", that's a 'good idea".........:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky

For those who DON'T know these are PRE cornell survey quotes (from both sides btw).......:darkbeer:


----------



## aceoky

This ONE MAY be MY fav.........though (I can and will post the link, but am not NOW because Tom used your name which I've taken out.....(your last name that would be).........:cocktail: 

NOBODY knew????? What about this turkey who posted this on Fishin.com?????

Jim Dicken (Guest) (874 posts) 
Feb-27-05, 11:20 PM (EST) "New Crossbow Regulations" 
The Commissioners will consider a change in the Bow Hunting laws to include Crossbows. 
The results of this regulation in other states has been an increase in the take of Bucks, and reduction in quaility of the herd. 
I hunt with a crossbow. I have arm problems that prevent me from hunting with a bow. I do not like this new law. It will increase the take of Turkeys, Increase the number of people wounding deer, and increase the number of bucks in the forest.
IF you have ever hunted with a crossbow it is literally impossible to get a GOOD shot past 20 yards. The noise of the crossbow allows the deer to move too much past 2o yards. New hunters will not have this knowledge, or experience. 
This will make poaching much easier in many areas, and with the increase of technology in crossbows we may find ourselves trying to find a way to rescind this law when they become as accurate and can shoot as far as a gun. 
The biggest problem I see is the increase in the fall turkey harvest, due to the increase of people in the woods, who can shoot the birds when the opportunity presents itself.
If something ain't broke.. dont fix it..
Contact your area commissioner and tell him how you feel whether you agree with me or not.
Jim Dicken



BTW--*Gassett address the concerns about the increas in bucks while he was shooting down Ballard during the meeting. No basis for that in Ky. Again, the numbers are on our side.*__________________
Size does matter! 

____________________________________

So much for the "how it was done" and "nobody KNEW" BS and NOW everyone can SEE why YOU would have decided to "fight"it YOU got "shot down" .......didn't YOU...........imagine that.........YOU "shot down" by Dr. Gassett.....WOW......and in public no less....HOW did that make YOU feel Ballard????

Man I'm glad I got so motivated (thank you Mike).....:cocktail: :darkbeer: 

See I could have just let this whole thing "go" but NO.......can't have that, Ace thinks he "won".......got to prove that wrong.........FINE by me......btw......btw it's ONLY going to get better from here on out......


----------



## aceoky

Isn't this "fun" ..............

BTW Ballard YOU accused me (more than once) of talking out of my ***** on things NOT knowing "squat" etc.etc. etc. and the Legislature had Nothing to do wth the meeting YOU said they had EVERY intention of moving ahead with SB 211.........

HERE is an email from Dr. Gassett........

This WAS from the very day of the "compromise" btw.........

First, this was *not my meeting*. It was a *meeting convened by key legislators to try to resolve this issue without resorting to legislation.[/B] 

I did not turn my back on the survey nor the Commission. 

I stood behind and continue to stand behind the survey results and the Commission gave me full support to get the issue resolved. I committed to the legislators and the group that if we could strike a compromise that was fair to all sportsmen (crossbow and archery hunters) that I would work with the Commission to maintain that position.

I could not and did not bind the commission to no future action. 
Jon (Gassett)

NOW I've had that all along,but saved it for now........I have to wonder IF you know why, I'd do that??? Next time YOU "think" I speak about things I KNOW "nothing about".......or as Mike wishes to portray, I'm "new" to this, or that I have NO contact with "relevent people" because of my location........maybe , just perhaps you and the rest will "get a clue".......

I may (or may not ) be many things but "stupid" and a "fool" or "liar" are NOT among them..........as by now you should ALL know.......

Now YOU said that what I posted was "absurd".......Well, I guess YOU have NO problem (and in public) also stating that to Dr. Gassett(that IS where after all I got it from and YOU stated right here YOU"D "straighten them out" for lying to me)(but then said I likely made it up)......... 

Continue on with the charade..........most by now KNOW what you guys did, (and didn't even try to do, and trust me , in the future it WILL come back and not only haunt you, but "bite" you all)......*


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> See Ace, imagine how much time, expense and anguish could have been saved if UCBK had simply put me in charge on day one.
> 
> As I'm sure you can read, I've never had any problems with expanding the xbow season. I've always had a big problem with total expansion and the manner in which it was handled.
> 
> I'm absolutely certain that if this total expansion "agenda" wasn't the driver, the xbowers would've enjoyed a better season than what they ended up with.


Thanks but "NO thanks" WE are "just fine" with those who don't feel the need to resort to YOUR tactics to "win" WE are for 'working together"........some wouldn't and WE know who they were , including Mike(LoweBow)......fwiw

And "in the end" WE will be known for what WE did(and just as important what we didn't do) JUST as you guys will, WE will come out "on top" in that, I can live with that...........


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> BTW--*Gassett address the concerns about the increas in bucks while he was shooting down Ballard during the meeting. No basis for that in Ky. Again, the numbers are on our side.*__________________
> Size does matter!
> 
> ____________________________________
> 
> So much for the "how it was done" and "nobody KNEW" BS and NOW everyone can SEE why YOU would have decided to "fight"it YOU got "shot down" .......didn't YOU...........imagine that.........YOU "shot down" by Dr. Gassett.....WOW......and in public no less....HOW did that make YOU feel Ballard????
> 
> Man I'm glad I got so motivated (thank you Mike).....:cocktail: :darkbeer:
> 
> See I could have just let this whole thing "go" but NO.......can't have that, Ace thinks he "won".......got to prove that wrong.........FINE by me......btw......btw it's ONLY going to get better from here on out......


Here's another one that needs to go to the "Guy who wasn't there but wants to tell everyone what happened" File. 

Ace - You weren't there, so PLEASE stop taking what somebody else posts and then passing it along as "FACT". 

If you're so interested in really determining who got "shot down" where, either (a) show up yourself (at least once) for some of these meetings; or (b) send an open records request to the Dept and ask for a copy of the tape so we won't have to sit here and listen to you pass along all this 3rd party gossip. 

p.s. I'll even help you along. That Commission Meeting was held on March 3, 2005. Report back after you get your ducks in a row. :RockOn:


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> Isn't this "fun" ..............
> 
> BTW Ballard YOU accused me (more than once) of talking out of my ***** on things NOT knowing "squat" etc.etc. etc. and the Legislature had Nothing to do wth the meeting YOU said they had EVERY intention of moving ahead with SB 211.........
> 
> HERE is an email from Dr. Gassett........
> 
> This WAS from the very day of the "compromise" btw.........
> 
> First, this was *not my meeting*. It was a *meeting convened by key legislators to try to resolve this issue without resorting to legislation.[/B]
> 
> I did not turn my back on the survey nor the Commission.
> 
> I stood behind and continue to stand behind the survey results and the Commission gave me full support to get the issue resolved. I committed to the legislators and the group that if we could strike a compromise that was fair to all sportsmen (crossbow and archery hunters) that I would work with the Commission to maintain that position.
> 
> I could not and did not bind the commission to no future action.
> Jon (Gassett)
> 
> NOW I've had that all along,but saved it for now........I have to wonder IF you know why, I'd do that??? Next time YOU "think" I speak about things I KNOW "nothing about".......or as Mike wishes to portray, I'm "new" to this, or that I have NO contact with "relevent people" because of my location........maybe , just perhaps you and the rest will "get a clue".......
> 
> I may (or may not ) be many things but "stupid" and a "fool" or "liar" are NOT among them..........as by now you should ALL know.......
> 
> Now YOU said that what I posted was "absurd".......Well, I guess YOU have NO problem (and in public) also stating that to Dr. Gassett(that IS where after all I got it from and YOU stated right here YOU"D "straighten them out" for lying to me)(but then said I likely made it up).........
> 
> Continue on with the charade..........most by now KNOW what you guys did, (and didn't even try to do, and trust me , in the future it WILL come back and not only haunt you, but "bite" you all)......*


*

First, it was Lowebow that said your post was "absurd." 

Second, it was "ignoramus", not "stupid" and a "fool" or "liar". 

Third, nice e-mail. Report back when the Commission votes to expand the xbow season again. :RockOn:*


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Here's another one that needs to go to the "Guy who wasn't there but wants to tell everyone what happened" File.
> 
> Ace - You weren't there, so PLEASE stop taking what somebody else posts and then passing it along as "FACT".
> 
> If you're so interested in really determining who got "shot down" where, either (a) show up yourself (at least once) for some of these meetings; or (b) send an open records request to the Dept and ask for a copy of the tape so we won't have to sit here and listen to you pass along all this 3rd party gossip.
> 
> p.s. I'll even help you along. That *Commission Meeting was held on March 3, 2005. * Report back after you get your ducks in a row. :RockOn:


I"m VERY much aware of that date (it was OUR 23 Wedding anniversary) still YOU have NO point..........YOU got "shot down" I've heard enough of that tape to NOT doubt it ....in fact imho YOU were "destroyed" during that......

By all means please continue, it has been my point all along to get the REAL truth out, the facts........NOT the BS that some keep "spewing forth"......


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> First, it was Lowebow that said your post was "absurd."
> 
> 
> NO it was YOU who said "my "facts" were NOT and I was talking out of my *****....and YOU would tell them the truth, that I had NO clue and "likely made it up myself".........I can and WILL post it again.......and YOu know I would
> 
> Second, it was "ignoramus", not "stupid" and a "fool" or "liar".
> 
> Not this time, besides, that was in "jest" NOT what I'm talking about and YOu know it...
> 
> Third, nice e-mail.
> YES it is and it disproves YOUR stance 100% that NO one in the legislature was against "taking sb 211 all the way"..........bad for YOU......but who cares??
> 
> 
> Report back when the Commission votes to expand the xbow season again. :RockOn:


YOU remember YOU just asked for that one......(if not I WILL have no problem (once again ) reminding you , as I often have to do).......:cocktail:


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> I"m VERY much aware of that date (it was OUR 23 Wedding anniversary) still YOU have NO point..........YOU got "shot down" I've heard enough of that tape to NOT doubt it ....in fact imho YOU were "destroyed" during that......
> 
> By all means please continue, it has been my point all along to get the REAL truth out, the facts........NOT the BS that some keep "spewing forth"......


Ace - Hate to call you on it, but you've left me no choice now that you're just making BS up.

LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE!!!!!

You obviously haven't listened to any tapes from that meeting. If you actually had, you wouldn't look like a total buffoon by saying Gassett "destroyed" anyone. 

NOBODY from the Dept (let alone Jon Gassett) specifically addressed ANY of the comments made by the people that attended. KDFWR officials gave some brief analysis. The public commented, and the commissioners voted. That was it. There was no back-and-forth arguing, so once again, I'd PLEASE ask you to refrain from talking about events that you don't know anything about. 

:banana: :banana: :RockOn:


----------



## ballard

LoweBow said:


> Absurd



Here it Ace. "Absurd" from Lowebow. 

Apology accepted. :RockOn:


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Ace - I'm not gonna be back on here this weekend, but this statement is an absolute *FALSEHOOD, and it's clear that you're really talking out of your ass now. *
> 
> 
> *
> If somebody told you that, either (a) they flat-out lied to you; or (b) they don't know what they're talking about.
> *
> 
> 
> DONE now I'll (we all will) be waiting for YOU to do that.....
> On the other hand, it's entirely possible (and in fact likely) that you just made it up yourself.
> 
> Myself and Dr. Gassett are NOT the same person nor entity, I'd think you'd know that fact.....:tongue:
> 
> If that's the case, you're a fool for making up nonsense for the sole purpose of creating enemies and escalating the antagonism.
> 
> Really, WHAT does that make YOU then??? All the time YOU'RE saying such BS as my making things up(yet they come from Dr. Gassett and others who were there .......YOU are amazing.....NO doubt
> 
> 
> This deal was struck to give the xbowers some expansion in an effort to overcome the rift that the issue had caused, not b/c anybody was afraid to run the table with SB 211. .
> 
> OH yeah, sb 211 was a "done deal" but the email from Dr. Gassett does NOT supprot that stance, NOR does any of the letters WE have from enough legislator members for ME to doubt THAT.......much less conceed it ...PLUS I have NO doubt(that's 0) the Gov would have vetoed it, IF it made it that far(doubtful in MY mind btw......)
> 
> Your suggestion that this compromise was forced on our side is really annoying.
> 
> Yeah, well often the truth is...
> 
> 
> 
> First, you ***** about the compromise season date and then that UCBK wasn't invited. Now, you pull a 180 degree turn and say that the Senators forced this compromise on us to avoid taking SB 211 to a vote???


Yet YOU maintain (though YOU also said YOU guys would NEVER compromise because of the "theat" a commision member made(ONE of NINE btw), NOW which is true YOU tell US ALL ...

Shall I once again post what Dr. Gassett said??? OR do you conceed to calling me a liar, and my information was "false".............YOU decide, 

BTW it's so fun, YOU being a Partner in a Law Firm where YOU are located, and MY being so far away from "there" (the action) and yet YOU somehow think I'm "out of touch" with matters.........by now someone in YOUR position should have learned better.......guess you're too busy trying to cover tracks???

"Funny thing" about truth, it's just as honest as math (if not more so) NO one can ever change it, YOU guys are "banking" on people will forget, saying we "cashed in our chips"(as Mike said)........

I'm betting WE won't allow them to ever forget, plus WE will make sure they KNOW the truth on what YOU guys did........then........we'll see who's side they're on (especially the gun hunters, YOU realize the REAL majority).......

Yep, this IS fun....


----------



## aceoky

ballard said:


> Ace - Hate to call you on it, but you've left me no choice now that you're just making BS up.
> 
> LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE!!!!!
> 
> You obviously haven't listened to any tapes from that meeting. If you actually had, you wouldn't look like a total buffoon by saying Gassett "destroyed" anyone.
> 
> NOBODY from the Dept (let alone Jon Gassett) specifically addressed ANY of the comments made by the people that attended. KDFWR officials gave some brief analysis. The public commented, and the commissioners voted. That was it. There was no back-and-forth arguing, so once again, I'd PLEASE ask you to refrain from talking about events that you don't know anything about.
> 
> :banana: :banana: :RockOn:


IF YOU say so, and btw the ONE buck limit was NEVER mentioned??? (and by whom)......btw, I have always said the exact same thing almost verbatem, no wonder I'd remember it, (though "odd" for tapes I've never even heard).......YOU sir are amazing........and I understand how it must feel a man in your "high level" being "shown" by a regular Ky hunter......Oh well, it is what it is, YOU can thank Mike btw, 

Ballard , I'm going to say this ONE more time, *I* was doing this LONG before YOU, believe what you will.........I'm not a "greenhorn" by any means.......MOST know this........MOST in my parts KNOW this, many elsewhere do as well and the KDFWR knows my name very well (as Tom C. knows very well also)........

I've been involved for over 25 years with the KDFWR, so I know what they are and are not.....I never ever said I agree with ALL they do (quite the contrary) the differnce IS.......I don't put down what good they do, and I TRY to WORK WITH THEM......NOT against their every move like some have lately........some of YOU think the "soloution" is to change the system, I DO NOT.....the system works.......and there ARE ways to work WITH it NOT around it (read circumvent, YOU like that word so well).........I know YOU won't hear ME or listen, but again, I've done this for a LONG time, either you live AND learn, OR you only live.........what do YOU choose to do??


----------



## aceoky

I am 100% happy that Mike (LowBowe) showed his true colors on this issue.....so much for his "high road"........


----------



## JDMiller

LoweBow said:


> Your clans true colors showed at the LKS Convention. Whiners that weren't happy w/ an extended season.




Mike ..... I stated I was through with this thread a long time ago & tried my best to let this comment slide...... but cant.

I dont remember very much whining.....I remember a lengthy discussion on this resolution from both sides and then we went to a vote. Sky asked for a show of hands in favor....because of a lack of support ....the resolution failed... the end. Whatever number voted for it.... I'll take your word because I could only see the show of hands in front of me....as for those opposed...who knows they did not ask for that...it was not necessary but if you want to count every member that did'nt ....thats ok too.

Now back to the whiners .... I guess that includes me , Sullivan , Conely , Watkins and dont forget Mcnamay(sp) out of the first. We spoke in favor of the resolution just as those that opposed had the opportunity as well. There was no resentment or anger shown by either side....nothing got out of hand ..nor did the moderator have to convene. It was basically nothing more than stating our opinion because we are members of the LKS and as delegates that is our right if we wish to publicly speak on any resolution at the appointed time. As far as the LKS president elections..... Ronnie won another term. If you check the thread on Ky.Hunting....several of the ones I listed above including myself publicly congratulated Ronnie and moved on. No whining there either.

As far as my involvement in this kinda stuff..... I'm pretty new to it. I actually belong to two LKS affiliated clubs and was asked by mossyhorns to serve as a delegate for the other club but I was committed to the UCBK. So I was going to be there one way or another. Then a few weeks later I get a phone call from Ronnie .... asking the UCBK to stay involved with the LKS and work together on future issues. Then I read your remarks about our true colors showing at the convention..... and you being a VP of the LKS..... its a contradicting opinion. 

I will also add that I have no personal beef with you ... nor Ronnie or anyone else for that matter. I also know you represent two organizations but your statements here concern the LKS convention ...... just how did we show our true colors . I'm sure the others of our clan would like to here this as well. If the LKS does not want or need our membership...we will consider this as well.


----------



## aceoky

Thank you JD, I know that was not easy for you to do, and I appreciate it very much.......I will say HE(Mike) has "lit a fire" under me, that I had hoped was " gone out".........fwiw........

But again my point is I appreciate your "stepping up".(yet again)......a great deal......

Jim


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Yeah sure they would, even Marvin admits to moving on from a crossbow (which he states he started with NOW uses another bow) ...... BTW it's "right here" for ALL to see.....


Actually smarty pants, i used to use a crossbow. Got disinterested for a few years ( stopped hunting deer in archery season) and saw the light. I didn't practice either. I WAS exactly what dalebow described. shot about 5 arrows the day before the opener if I was lucky.


----------



## thesource

LOL ....

Hey Marvin....

Let's dig up a bunch of old posts with people's opinions and portray them as actual "facts" all day and all night just to try and support an unsupportable position, you want to? 

This is like watching a 1 legged man in a butt kicking contest.....

Guess who's the 1 legged man?


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> LOL ....
> 
> Hey Marvin....
> 
> Let's dig up a bunch of old posts with people's opinions and portray them as actual "facts" all day and all night just to try and support an unsupportable position, you want to?
> 
> This is like watching a 1 legged man in a butt kicking contest.....
> 
> Guess who's the 1 legged man?


Might as well. Maybe we can find all of Dougie's sock puppets posts too. They don't call him kick stand for nothing. Looks like you and DOC had a nice dance...:tongue:


----------



## LoweBow

JDMiller said:


> Mike ..... I stated I was through with this thread a long time ago & tried my best to let this comment slide...... but cant.
> 
> I dont remember very much whining.....I remember a lengthy discussion on this resolution from both sides and then we went to a vote. Sky asked for a show of hands in favor....because of a lack of support ....the resolution failed... the end. Whatever number voted for it.... I'll take your word because I could only see the show of hands in front of me....as for those opposed...who knows they did not ask for that...it was not necessary but if you want to count every member that did'nt ....thats ok too.
> 
> Now back to the whiners .... I guess that includes me , Sullivan , Conely , Watkins and dont forget Mcnamay(sp) out of the first. We spoke in favor of the resolution just as those that opposed had the opportunity as well. There was no resentment or anger shown by either side....nothing got out of hand ..nor did the moderator have to convene. It was basically nothing more than stating our opinion because we are members of the LKS and as delegates that is our right if we wish to publicly speak on any resolution at the appointed time. As far as the LKS president elections..... Ronnie won another term. If you check the thread on Ky.Hunting....several of the ones I listed above including myself publicly congratulated Ronnie and moved on. No whining there either.
> 
> As far as my involvement in this kinda stuff..... I'm pretty new to it. I actually belong to two LKS affiliated clubs and was asked by mossyhorns to serve as a delegate for the other club but I was committed to the UCBK. So I was going to be there one way or another. Then a few weeks later I get a phone call from Ronnie .... asking the UCBK to stay involved with the LKS and work together on future issues. Then I read your remarks about our true colors showing at the convention..... and you being a VP of the LKS..... its a contradicting opinion.
> 
> I will also add that I have no personal beef with you ... nor Ronnie or anyone else for that matter. I also know you represent two organizations but your statements here concern the LKS convention ...... just how did we show our true colors . I'm sure the others of our clan would like to here this as well. If the LKS does not want or need our membership...we will consider this as well.


JD,
As I've shown in the past I have nothing but respect for all parties involved that know how to act appropriately. You, Tom, Kalen, even Terry at times. You guys are going to go out and enjoy what you have gotten. This guys has for the last how many months continued to spew half truths and HIS version of the "FACTS". He may be the greatest guys since Abe Lincoln, but enough is enough. Let it be. 
You guys deserve props for actually standing up for what you believe as I and many other did. We (you and I etc..) showed up and spoke, drove countless miles, gave up family time, etc. To show that we gave a dam...one way or another. I'm sorry, but Jim (ACE) wants to spout his "Facts", but he wasn't there. He didn't come. He backseat drove and wants to continually snipe at the guys that were involved and either right or wrong showed involvement. That in my mind is just WRONG. 
Activism is a sign of someone that cares about a certain thing. I know Ace did a ton of typing, but he's still typing and won't let the wounds heal. Then when he pokes the hive w/ a stick for months he screams that it's the bee's fault for stinging him. He needs to take some lessons from a class act like yourself and be the strong silent type. When you speak you say what you mean and people listen! 
Your message is beinig diluted by this constant blathering of FACTS....FACTS....FACTS.....FACTS!!! Soon (as in now) there are No facts left. 

OH.....Sorry.....Now I see where Ace kept saying my "new found power was going to my head".....took me a while to figure that out. I thought he was talking about me being 3rd Federation Director...
Vice Prez.
Where to begin......
I "was" voted in as VP. that is a fact. what most don't know is that I wrote and sent a letter of resignation on Monday after the LKS BOD meeting. After thinking about my duties to the 3rd and w/ one more year as UBK VP...I felt it just toooooo much time away from my family, farm, work, fun, etc. So.....you don't have to worry about me. You wouldn' t have to worry anyways...I will do as my contituants ask..My history w/ UBK shows that. I have shown that I don't have to agree (xbow expansion) to carry out w/ what they ask. 

I apologize to you JD and to all your members as I didn't intend to hurt any of you in any way. You all are good people. The jury is still out on Ace though. Actions speak louder than words most times. So far all I've seen is word.....lots and lots of words..............let me say that again....lots, tons, mounds, hords, oodles, heaps, ............lots of words.
He'll gain respect from me when he earns it. 

I'm done....and I unlike some am a man of my word. If I have to come back I'll make sure I get banned so I can't come back.


----------



## Free Range

> By Ace
> NOW Ballard YOU want to "cast doubt" on a survey, that I have NOW proven you supported.......that's "great"


Sounds like to me he supported having a survey done, not the result driven way this one was worded.




> By Ace
> Poor Free Range, with every single post he looks yet more foolish (IF that's even possible)......where IS YOUR data and facts to support YOUR stance??? without it.........your opinion counts for nought in any of this........once again.......YOU "think" you're making points, but are not......


I have stated my stance over and over and backed it up with MY facts. But I must agree it is more fun showing how your facts are total hog wash and most of the time they don’t even rank as an honest opinion. 



> I"m VERY much aware of that date (it was OUR 23 Wedding anniversary) still YOU have NO point..........YOU got "shot down" I've heard enough of that tape to NOT doubt it ....in fact imho YOU were "destroyed" during that......


Wedding anniversary, navy school, what’s going to keep you from the next important meeting a quilting class?


----------



## Marvin

Free Range said:


> Wedding anniversary, navy school, what’s going to keep you from the next important meeting a quilting class?


Nope free range. He will be in canada on a "fishing trip" if you know what i mean :wink:


----------



## Free Range

What kind of bait would one use on that kind of trip, I wonder. :wink:


----------



## JDMiller

LoweBow said:


> JD,
> As I've shown in the past I have nothing but respect for all parties involved that know how to act appropriately. You, Tom, Kalen, even Terry at times. You guys are going to go out and enjoy what you have gotten. This guys has for the last how many months continued to spew half truths and HIS version of the "FACTS". He may be the greatest guys since Abe Lincoln, but enough is enough. Let it be.
> You guys deserve props for actually standing up for what you believe as I and many other did. We (you and I etc..) showed up and spoke, drove countless miles, gave up family time, etc. To show that we gave a dam...one way or another. I'm sorry, but Jim (ACE) wants to spout his "Facts", but he wasn't there. He didn't come. He backseat drove and wants to continually snipe at the guys that were involved and either right or wrong showed involvement. That in my mind is just WRONG.
> Activism is a sign of someone that cares about a certain thing. I know Ace did a ton of typing, but he's still typing and won't let the wounds heal. Then when he pokes the hive w/ a stick for months he screams that it's the bee's fault for stinging him. He needs to take some lessons from a class act like yourself and be the strong silent type. When you speak you say what you mean and people listen!
> Your message is beinig diluted by this constant blathering of FACTS....FACTS....FACTS.....FACTS!!! Soon (as in now) there are No facts left.
> 
> OH.....Sorry.....Now I see where Ace kept saying my "new found power was going to my head".....took me a while to figure that out. I thought he was talking about me being 3rd Federation Director...
> Vice Prez.
> Where to begin......
> I "was" voted in as VP. that is a fact. what most don't know is that I wrote and sent a letter of resignation on Monday after the LKS BOD meeting. After thinking about my duties to the 3rd and w/ one more year as UBK VP...I felt it just toooooo much time away from my family, farm, work, fun, etc. So.....you don't have to worry about me. You wouldn' t have to worry anyways...I will do as my contituants ask..My history w/ UBK shows that. I have shown that I don't have to agree (xbow expansion) to carry out w/ what they ask.
> 
> I apologize to you JD and to all your members as I didn't intend to hurt any of you in any way. You all are good people. The jury is still out on Ace though. Actions speak louder than words most times. So far all I've seen is word.....lots and lots of words..............let me say that again....lots, tons, mounds, hords, oodles, heaps, ............lots of words.
> He'll gain respect from me when he earns it.
> 
> I'm done....and I unlike some am a man of my word. If I have to come back I'll make sure I get banned so I can't come back.




Mike......... I appreciate your comments and I know you stand behind your words. I was unaware that you had resigned your position and fully understand .....we have to keep our priorities in check. The events of the last year have took a toll on many of us. We have all made statements that were probably not too proud of......myself included. I also think theres a lot of people that think this issue was a real free-for-all from the opinions I read but anyone that was involved at the meetings knows that was not really the case. There will always be division on any issue regardless of the subject.....people will agree and disagree. Thats not a bad thing ......if you can keep focused on what your trying to achieve. 

As far as I'm concerned .....we got a good start and I hope there are a lot of sportsmen that will enjoy it and appreciate to a extent what it took to get there. In my opinion.....its up to them now to make it grow. Until then I hope you have a great hunting season.


----------



## ballard

JDMiller said:


> Mike......... I appreciate your comments and I know you stand behind your words. I was unaware that you had resigned your position and fully understand .....we have to keep our priorities in check. The events of the last year have took a toll on many of us. We have all made statements that were probably not too proud of......myself included. I also think theres a lot of people that think this issue was a real free-for-all from the opinions I read but anyone that was involved at the meetings knows that was not really the case. There will always be division on any issue regardless of the subject.....people will agree and disagree. Thats not a bad thing ......if you can keep focused on what your trying to achieve.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned .....we got a good start and I hope there are a lot of sportsmen that will enjoy it and appreciate to a extent what it took to get there. In my opinion.....its up to them now to make it grow. Until then I hope you have a great hunting season.


JD - I mirror Mike's thoughts in a lot of regards. I harbor no resentment against anyone over all this xbow stuff, and certainly not Ace. I know he's fighting for what he believes in, but I'm just fairly convinced in my own mind that it's time to move forward and stop constantly rehashing what happened in KY, especially on a general archery website where a lot of folks don't know the facts and are getting only one side of the story, some of which is based on unreliable information. 

A. I think the LKS should embrace the UCBK, and vice versa. Although a lot of harsh statements get passed back and forth on these forums when tempers flare, I think it's safe to say that most of us (on both sides of the aisle) are NOT nearly as inflexible as we sometimes appear. Time has a funny way of healing old wounds. 

B. I think the expanded xbow season will provide significant opportunity in the coming seasons for those that decide to use that weapon. I wouldn't even be surprised if there was more expansion in the future. I think that Mike's "true colors" comments were primarily based on the fact that the xbowers hadn't even had one season under the current expanded season and there was a new push for a bigger bite of the apple. I understand UCBK's ultimate goals, but I'm not sure the LKS xbow expansion resolution was well timed. At some point in the future, I suspect that we'll have a balance of seasons that everyone can live with.


----------



## doctariAFC

Marvin said:


> Might as well. Maybe we can find all of Dougie's sock puppets posts too. They don't call him kick stand for nothing. Looks like you and DOC had a nice dance...:tongue:


Yeah, I provide the inside scoop (being on the inside, I have that kind of knowledge) and get beat up over it. Funny, isn't it?

That's ok. The crossbow will become a part of hunting in NYS, and, although I cannot comment on when at this point in time, it will happen sooner rather than later. In fcat, the draft proposal I have been working on is nearly complete. A few more loose ends to clean up, in terms of reporting systems and such (this is actually a couple bills, not just one!) and a very viable and supportable bill will be brought forth.


----------



## Marvin

doctariAFC said:


> Yeah, I provide the inside scoop (being on the inside, I have that kind of knowledge) and get beat up over it. Funny, isn't it?


Inside scoop? 
Well...if you say so Doc. :zip: :wink: :tongue:


----------



## doctariAFC

Marvin said:


> Inside scoop?
> Well...if you say so Doc. :zip: :wink: :tongue:


Yes indeed. I just had another one hit the fan concerning Zoar Valley and the Multiple Use designation for this area of the Cattaraugus Creek. The politics behind much of these "messes" are incredible. Enough to drive one to drink.

The next Federation Meeting should be very animated indeed. Many issues to go over, let alone taking our vote on this year's NYSCC Resolutions, including my emergency resolution concerning the WHA.

Once I have completed my draft proposal for crossbows in New York and the process begins to move forward, I will post it for all to attack  I will warn everyone in advance, the document will be quite lengthy, in terms of supporting evidence. Updated supporting evidence will be added once the new USF&W Surveys are published.


----------



## aceoky

Ballard the "bigger bite of the apple" was only a couple of weeks (the pre-rut no less) and would have kept the season "on"(straight through from Oct 1 - Dec 31) rather than on/off/on/off, we'd hoped to avoid the confusion from the on/off/on/off that many will no doubt face (especially youth hunters and new deer hunters).........It's NOT like we were trying to add months.......to this date no one has told us why we got the on/off/on/off, and why the removing the "off days" was such a "problem" or why it should be "fought" as it was.....(even the poll on kyhunting net showed support for that resoloution......)

Many of us, thought it wasn't asking so much, and since we were given NO good reason (or any reason at all) for why it was set up that way......we felt it was worth a try......I'd say most of us would do so again, it simply doesn't make since to have an archery season structured that way to some of us....

As for "rehashing" what happened in Ky it was never to "rub it in" or anything like that, it was for others to see what happened, I tried my best to not be biased, and report the events as I know them.....at no time did I ever lie, or make up anything, and again it was for information purposes, most on both sides know mistakes were made by both, it was my hopes that others could avoid making the same ones we all did make.......no more and no less.......

As for the March 3, 2005 meeting WE (the pro-side) were not there (most of us) because and simply because we understood it to be a "done deal" at that time (it had been posted .....the new season.... on the KDFWR website and in Ky Afiled mag......NO reason for us (at that time) to suspect our input was needed) in hindsight we were all very wrong, not knowing several from the "other side" would show up to contest it....

Truth be told, at the time we had no reason to expect that, much less to suspect that taking place.......THAT was kept "quiet"...(a good move on their part, I'd say)

I can now see though, that some are taking this the wrong way, as an attemtp on my part to "continue to stir the pot" and keep the "fights" going, I can only assure them (and everyone) that was never my intention, and I apologize for it being taken that way....


----------



## Marvin

aceoky said:


> Ballard the "bigger bite of the apple" was only a couple of weeks (the pre-rut no less) and would have kept the season "on"(straight through from Oct 1 - Dec 31) rather than on/off/on/off, we'd hoped to avoid the confusion from the on/off/on/off that many will no doubt face (especially youth hunters and new deer hunters).........It's NOT like we were trying to add months.......to this date no one has told us why we got the on/off/on/off, and why the removing the "off days" was such a "problem" or why it should be "fought" as it was.....(even the poll on kyhunting net showed support for that resoloution......)
> 
> Many of us, thought it wasn't asking so much, and since we were given NO good reason (or any reason at all) for why it was set up that way......we felt it was worth a try......I'd say most of us would do so again, it simply doesn't make since to have an archery season structured that way to some of us....
> 
> *As for "rehashing" what happened in Ky it was never to "rub it in" or anything like that, it was for others to see what happened, I tried my best to not be biased, and report the events as I know them.....at no time did I ever lie, or make up anything, and again it was for information purposes, most on both sides know mistakes were made by both, it was my hopes that others could avoid making the same ones we all did make.......no more and no less.......*
> 
> As for the March 3, 2005 meeting WE (the pro-side) were not there (most of us) because and simply because we understood it to be a "done deal" at that time (it had been posted .....the new season.... on the KDFWR website and in Ky Afiled mag......NO reason for us (at that time) to suspect our input was needed) in hindsight we were all very wrong, not knowing several from the "other side" would show up to contest it....
> 
> Truth be told, at the time we had no reason to expect that, much less to suspect that taking place.......THAT was kept "quiet"...(a good move on their part, I'd say)
> 
> I can now see though, that some are taking this the wrong way, as an attemtp on my part to "continue to stir the pot" and keep the "fights" going, I can only assure them (and everyone) that was never my intention, and I apologize for it being taken that way....


Can you actually type that ( bold part) with a straight face?  Too funny. Kiss and make up before ( and I quote) " not settling for anything but full expansion" :beat:


----------



## ballard

aceoky said:


> As for the March 3, 2005 meeting WE (the pro-side) were not there (most of us) because and simply because we understood it to be a "done deal" at that time (it had been posted .....the new season.... on the KDFWR website and in Ky Afiled mag......NO reason for us (at that time) to suspect our input was needed) in hindsight we were all very wrong, not knowing several from the "other side" would show up to contest it....
> 
> Truth be told, at the time we had no reason to expect that, much less to suspect that taking place.......THAT was kept "quiet"...(a good move on their part, I'd say)


Ace - I agree that it was a "done deal" before the March 3, 2005 meeting. That's one big-ass problem. 

Anybody that isn't a "greenhorn" (i.e. people like you that have been doing this "for a lot longer" than me and have been actively involved with KDFWR for over 25 years) would surely know that it is ILLEGAL for a public agency to privately vote and make agency decisions BEFORE a public meeting. 

Thank you for acknowledging this here today.


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Yeah, I provide the inside scoop (being on the inside, I have that kind of knowledge) and get beat up over it. Funny, isn't it?
> 
> That's ok. The crossbow will become a part of hunting in NYS, and, although I cannot comment on when at this point in time, it will happen sooner rather than later. In fcat, the draft proposal I have been working on is nearly complete. A few more loose ends to clean up, in terms of reporting systems and such (this is actually a couple bills, not just one!) and a very viable and supportable bill will be brought forth.



Interesting. That means you are working in direct opposition to our state's bowhunting organization,NYB and are actively subverting the will of NY hunters as expressed in 2 Cornell surveys.

Who, exactly, do you claim to represent again? It can't be bowhunters.

Oh, yea....walleye fishermen.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Interesting. That means you are working in direct opposition to our state's bowhunting organization,NYB and are actively subverting the will of NY hunters as expressed in 2 Cornell surveys.
> 
> Who, exactly, do you claim to represent again? It can't be bowhunters.
> 
> Oh, yea....walleye fishermen.



Selfishness and greed are not interests that should be supported. NYBowhunters have been fed a line of BS by that odious organization that posts lies about crossbows. In the long run, the best interests of all bowhunters is expanding their ranks rather than selfish shortsighted ego driven BS such as spewed by source.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> In the long run, the best interests of all bowhunters is expanding their ranks rather than selfish shortsighted ego driven BS such as spewed by source.


It should be crystal clear to even the dimmest bulb that crossbow legalization is first and foremost in the best interest of crossbowers and potential crossbowers, not bowhunters, and it comes entirely at the expense of bowhunters.

Bowhunters do not "expand their ranks" by non-bowhunters suddenly declaring that , viola, they are now bowhunters. Bowhunters expand their ranks by recruiting and retaining actual bowhunters.


Crossbow advocates are furthering their own self-serving interests, period. I've seen absolutely NO evidence whatsoever that you, or crossbowers in general, have much interest if any for protecting bowhunting's heritage and institutions.

With allies like you, who needs enemies?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> It should be crystal clear to even the dimmest bulb that crossbow legalization is first and foremost in the best interest of crossbowers and potential crossbowers, not bowhunters, and it comes entirely at the expense of bowhunters.
> 
> Bowhunters do not "expand their ranks" by non-bowhunters suddenly declaring that , viola, they are now bowhunters. Bowhunters expand their ranks by recruiting and retaining actual bowhunters.
> 
> 
> Crossbow advocates are furthering their own self-serving interests, period. I've seen absolutely NO evidence whatsoever that you, or crossbowers in general, have much interest if any for protecting bowhunting's heritage and institutions.
> 
> With allies like you, who needs enemies?


more psychobabble-crossbow archers, compound archers, trad archers-all are actual bowhunters if they hunt in archery season legally. Where do you think "real" bowhunters come from source? the same place crossbow hunters come from. Your claim of what counts as "protecting bowhunting heritage is a code word for greed and selfishness. Heritage and institution were the language of discrimination and remain so. What is the heritage of fiber optic battery lit sights, trigger releases, 80% letoff bows with mechanical broadheads? 100 years ago someone could look at my excalibur and say-its a crossbow. I doubt someone would could say what my compound hunting bow was then

I love the source's debating technique. Protecting bowhunting=keeping the woods free of crossbows

heritage-maintaining selfish laws based on lies and disinformation
tradidion-see above.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> 100 years ago someone could look at my excalibur and say-its a crossbow. I doubt someone would could say what my compound hunting bow was then


LOL - more idiotic crossbow bullcrap.

First, I think they could definitely know a compound is a bow. They sure as heck would when someone drew it.

Second, following your logic, what would they think of a ten point?

Duh....you are tripping over your own gaps of logic.


----------



## ballard

. . . .and Ace wondered why we were viewing his ODNR statistics with a jaundiced eye. . . . .And this is just the deal offered to your run-of-the-mill ODNR employees. I wonder what kind of "discount" Horton offers to the real decision makers at our public agencies? :wink: :wink: :wink: 


ODNR Employees Received Crossbow Discounts

Reprinted by permission from the Columbus Dispatch newspaper:
Crossbow discounts defended: Company gives ODNR employees break on prices; department officials say no ethics rules violated.

*The world's largest maker of crossbows offers deep discounts to every employee of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the agency that regulates hunting*.

An official with the company, Horton Crossbows of Tallmadge in Summit County, said it's part of a *national effort to support states friendly to crossbow hunting, such as Ohio, and to win over states that aren't.*

Not every state is receptive to such offers.

"Our ethics law would kind of frown on that," said Fred Harders, an assistant director with the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.

Alabama bans crossbow hunting, except for disabled hunters who are granted permission. Nine states limit or prohibit even disabled hunters from using crossbows.

Crossbows, configured like a rifle, shoot arrows. Ohio is one of five states that allows hunters to use crossbows during arche3ry season without special restrictions.

More deer are killed in Ohio with crossbows than with standard bows and arrows.

According to the natural-resources agency, about 200,000 bowhunters participated in the archery deer-hunting season that began Oct. 4 and ended Jan. 31. During the 2002-03 season, bowhunters killed 48,904 deer, up from the 41,526 the previous season.

*Horton allows natural-resources employees to purchase one crossbow a year at half the wholesale price, as well as discounted arrows and other equipment.*

*One Horton crossbow model, for example, sells for about $250 in stores. dealers pay $210 for them, according to the company. State natural-resources employees pay $105.*

Other Horton crossbow packages retail for more than $700.

"It's a national program that we offer to all 50 states," said Lee Zimmerman, vice president of sales for Horton. "It's educational. It's safety-support of the product we make."

Zimmerman added that the company has openly offered the deal for years.

"If it's unethical," he said, "we do a (poor) job of hiding it."

Agency officials said they don't keep track of how many of the department's 2,000 employees take advantage of the Horton discounts, and the company wouldn't say.

The Ohio Ethics Commission, which interprets conflict-of-interest questions for state agencies and employees, generally recommends against accepting gifts.

State employees have been prosecuted under the ethics law or fired for receiving golf outings, meals and other valuable freebies.

In 2001, the commission outlined rules for employees discounts. Discounts are allowed only if they are broad enough to limit the appearance of currying favor with decision-makers, and offered in a similar manner to companies and groups in the private sector - for example, a "state employees day" at an amusement park.

*The commission hasn't received any complaints or been asked about the Horton Crossbows discounts, according to commission Executive Director David Freel.

Vicki Mountz, who oversees Ohio hunter-education programs for the natural-resources department, considers the crossbow discounts comparable to the amusement park example.

"Do I see it as an impropriety? No," she said. "It's never been brought up to me."

The department's lawyers reviewed the discounts after questions from The Dispatch.

"They saw no problem or no breach of ethics," spokeswoman Jan Beathard said.
*
Ohio has allowed crossbow hunting for more than 30 years.

Georgia legalized crossbow hunting in 2002. Horton donated about a dozen crossbows for hunter-education classes, but state officials declined the employee-discount offer.

"That offer was made, but our state employees are not allowed to take advantage of that," said Capt. Mike England of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources.

"It's part of our gratuity policy" prohibiting state employees from taking anything worth more than $25, Englund said.

Among archery enthusiasts, opinions are mixed about crossbow hunting.

Purists view crossbows as inappropriate during the weeks set aside for bow hunting. Crossbow hunters, however, say they are a safe and effective option for hunters who are physically unable to shoot a standard bow.

The Alliance for Disabled Sportsmen Rights has filed federal discrimination complaints and has threatened to sue states that ban crossbows, though the group distances itself from the crossbow industry.

"Our laws we're crafting are aimed at disabled use," said Tom LaQuey, the group's founder and a Colorado elk hunter who can't hunt wit a bow or a rifle because of a shoulder injury.

Horton has provided complimentary crossbows to officials in states that are thinking about lifting their bans, most recently in Rhode Island. A bill before the Rhode Island state legislature would repeal the crossbow-hunting ban.

Zimmerman said the goal in Rhode Island, as in Ohio, is to promote safe hunting and inform state officials about crossbows.

He said the company sends instructional videos, equipment and information about the state-employee-discount program to make it easier for state game wardens and hunter-safety instructors to do their jobs.

"In our industry, you’ve got to support the education side," Zimmerman said. "Where is supplying equipment for hunter education unethical?"

Alabama accepts discounts on merchandise purchased by the state and used for hunter education and other programs.

"But that's property of the state," Harders said.


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> . . . .and Ace wondered why we were viewing his ODNR statistics with a jaundiced eye. . . . .And this is just the deal offered to your run-of-the-mill ODNR employees. I wonder what kind of "discount" Horton offers to the real decision makers at our public agencies? :wink: :wink: :wink:
> 
> 
> ODNR Employees Received Crossbow Discounts
> 
> Reprinted by permission from the Columbus Dispatch newspaper:
> Crossbow discounts defended: Company gives ODNR employees break on prices; department officials say no ethics rules violated.
> 
> *The world's largest maker of crossbows offers deep discounts to every employee of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the agency that regulates hunting*.
> 
> An official with the company, Horton Crossbows of Tallmadge in Summit County, said it's part of a *national effort to support states friendly to crossbow hunting, such as Ohio, and to win over states that aren't.*
> 
> Not every state is receptive to such offers.
> 
> "Our ethics law would kind of frown on that," said Fred Harders, an assistant director with the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.
> 
> Alabama bans crossbow hunting, except for disabled hunters who are granted permission. Nine states limit or prohibit even disabled hunters from using crossbows.
> 
> Crossbows, configured like a rifle, shoot arrows. Ohio is one of five states that allows hunters to use crossbows during arche3ry season without special restrictions.
> 
> More deer are killed in Ohio with crossbows than with standard bows and arrows.
> 
> According to the natural-resources agency, about 200,000 bowhunters participated in the archery deer-hunting season that began Oct. 4 and ended Jan. 31. During the 2002-03 season, bowhunters killed 48,904 deer, up from the 41,526 the previous season.
> 
> *Horton allows natural-resources employees to purchase one crossbow a year at half the wholesale price, as well as discounted arrows and other equipment.*
> 
> *One Horton crossbow model, for example, sells for about $250 in stores. dealers pay $210 for them, according to the company. State natural-resources employees pay $105.*
> 
> Other Horton crossbow packages retail for more than $700.
> 
> "It's a national program that we offer to all 50 states," said Lee Zimmerman, vice president of sales for Horton. "It's educational. It's safety-support of the product we make."
> 
> Zimmerman added that the company has openly offered the deal for years.
> 
> "If it's unethical," he said, "we do a (poor) job of hiding it."
> 
> Agency officials said they don't keep track of how many of the department's 2,000 employees take advantage of the Horton discounts, and the company wouldn't say.
> 
> The Ohio Ethics Commission, which interprets conflict-of-interest questions for state agencies and employees, generally recommends against accepting gifts.
> 
> State employees have been prosecuted under the ethics law or fired for receiving golf outings, meals and other valuable freebies.
> 
> In 2001, the commission outlined rules for employees discounts. Discounts are allowed only if they are broad enough to limit the appearance of currying favor with decision-makers, and offered in a similar manner to companies and groups in the private sector - for example, a "state employees day" at an amusement park.
> 
> *The commission hasn't received any complaints or been asked about the Horton Crossbows discounts, according to commission Executive Director David Freel.
> 
> Vicki Mountz, who oversees Ohio hunter-education programs for the natural-resources department, considers the crossbow discounts comparable to the amusement park example.
> 
> "Do I see it as an impropriety? No," she said. "It's never been brought up to me."
> 
> The department's lawyers reviewed the discounts after questions from The Dispatch.
> 
> "They saw no problem or no breach of ethics," spokeswoman Jan Beathard said.
> *
> Ohio has allowed crossbow hunting for more than 30 years.
> 
> Georgia legalized crossbow hunting in 2002. Horton donated about a dozen crossbows for hunter-education classes, but state officials declined the employee-discount offer.
> 
> "That offer was made, but our state employees are not allowed to take advantage of that," said Capt. Mike England of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources.
> 
> "It's part of our gratuity policy" prohibiting state employees from taking anything worth more than $25, Englund said.
> 
> Among archery enthusiasts, opinions are mixed about crossbow hunting.
> 
> Purists view crossbows as inappropriate during the weeks set aside for bow hunting. Crossbow hunters, however, say they are a safe and effective option for hunters who are physically unable to shoot a standard bow.
> 
> The Alliance for Disabled Sportsmen Rights has filed federal discrimination complaints and has threatened to sue states that ban crossbows, though the group distances itself from the crossbow industry.
> 
> "Our laws we're crafting are aimed at disabled use," said Tom LaQuey, the group's founder and a Colorado elk hunter who can't hunt wit a bow or a rifle because of a shoulder injury.
> 
> Horton has provided complimentary crossbows to officials in states that are thinking about lifting their bans, most recently in Rhode Island. A bill before the Rhode Island state legislature would repeal the crossbow-hunting ban.
> 
> Zimmerman said the goal in Rhode Island, as in Ohio, is to promote safe hunting and inform state officials about crossbows.
> 
> He said the company sends instructional videos, equipment and information about the state-employee-discount program to make it easier for state game wardens and hunter-safety instructors to do their jobs.
> 
> "In our industry, you’ve got to support the education side," Zimmerman said. "Where is supplying equipment for hunter education unethical?"
> 
> Alabama accepts discounts on merchandise purchased by the state and used for hunter education and other programs.
> 
> "But that's property of the state," Harders said.



most of that is old news...I am just wondering what Ace is getting or Gassett is getting myself. What funny is ODNR would not realease the names of the employees that took horton up on their "contribution of conservation efforts" It was against the law and they knew it. All gifts must be reported. they hide someone from shame if you ask me.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL - more idiotic crossbow bullcrap.
> 
> First, I think they could definitely know a compound is a bow. They sure as heck would when someone drew it.
> 
> Second, following your logic, what would they think of a ten point?
> 
> Duh....you are tripping over your own gaps of logic.



its funny watching the source talk about logic when source has already admitted that legalization of crossbows will cause no problems to either society or the health of the deer herd. So why does source demand archery apartheid? Why does he want "real bowhunters" to have less time (yes, I know-his idea of a crossbow season is sticking them with the gun hunters) to bowhunt? Because Source has self image problems and doesn't want anyone thinking he is a crossbow archer rather than a he man real bowhunter.

poor source


----------



## ballard

Marvin said:


> most of that is old news...I am just wondering what Ace is getting or Gassett is getting myself. What funny is ODNR would not realease the names of the employees that took horton up on their "contribution of conservation efforts" It was against the law and they knew it. All gifts must be reported. they hide someone from shame if you ask me.


It may be old news, but there's a lot of folks that probably don't know about it. I doubt Ace is getting diddly, but I can't speak to our KDFWR officials. 

Believe me, given the noticeable and virtually complete lack of any kind of grass roots push for xbows, many other people have been pondering where this sudden urge to expand the xbow season in KY came from. 

I do know that only two members of the public spoke in favor of xbows at the initial xbow expansion meeting. Both sold xbows, and one was an out of state xbow manufacturer's rep from Ohio. 

:wink:


----------



## Marvin

ballard said:


> It may be old news, but there's a lot of folks that probably don't know about it. I doubt Ace is getting diddly, but I can't speak to our KDFWR officials.
> 
> Believe me, given the noticeable and virtually complete lack of any kind of grass roots push for xbows, many other people have been pondering where this sudden urge to expand the xbow season in KY came from.
> 
> I do know that only two members of the public spoke in favor of xbows at the initial xbow expansion meeting. Both sold xbows, and one was an out of state xbow manufacturer's rep from Ohio.
> 
> :wink:


believe me I know what your talking about. Ever played that game "corn-hole"?:wink: :zip:


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> its funny watching the source talk about logic when source has already admitted that legalization of crossbows will cause no problems to either society or the health of the deer herd. So why does source demand archery apartheid? Why does he want "real bowhunters" to have less time (yes, I know-his idea of a crossbow season is sticking them with the gun hunters) to bowhunt? Because Source has self image problems and doesn't want anyone thinking he is a crossbow archer rather than a he man real bowhunter.
> 
> poor source


You try to complicate everything (must be a Democrat.)

Its really quite simple:

WHY don't we allow Centerfires in MZ season? 
Not the same - They do not belong. 

WHY don't we allow MZ into bowseason?
Not the same - They do not belong.

Why don't we allow xbow into bow season?
Not the same - They do not belong.


If you feel the urge to hunt in bowseason, get off your fat and lazy butt and hunt with a bow. Otherwise, sit there and be quiet.


----------



## ballard

Marvin said:


> believe me I know what your talking about. Ever played that game "corn-hole"?:wink: :zip:


"corn-hole"? Nope and from the sounds of it, I don't plan on playing it any time soon either. :087:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You try to complicate everything (must be a Democrat.)
> 
> Its really quite simple:
> 
> WHY don't we allow Centerfires in MZ season?
> Not the same - They do not belong.
> 
> WHY don't we allow MZ into bowseason?
> Not the same - They do not belong.
> 
> Why don't we allow xbow into bow season?
> Not the same - They do not belong.
> 
> 
> If you feel the urge to hunt in bowseason, get off your fat and lazy butt and hunt with a bow. Otherwise, sit there and be quiet.


more word games-the sign of someone who cannot think logically

why do we allow lever action rifles to hunt with bolt action rifles-
because they basically are the same

why do we allow compound bows to hunt with recurve bows even though the learning curve is vastly different-because once you master one, the range is essentially the same

crossbows are far closer to compound bows in learning and operation (look through a peep sight-pull a trigger) than compounds are to bare bows. 
IN terms of range, power and accuracy, you cannot make an argument that crossbows have any advantage that remotely matters

as to your comment about me being lazy in my archery-it just shows how truly ignorant you are. -and unlike you, there are plenty of people who can vouch for me on this board


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Interesting. That means you are working in direct opposition to our state's bowhunting organization,NYB and are actively subverting the will of NY hunters as expressed in 2 Cornell surveys.
> 
> Who, exactly, do you claim to represent again? It can't be bowhunters.
> 
> Oh, yea....walleye fishermen.


I represent all sportsmen, Source. Not one faction over another.

When you're in a position such as I, you listen to all, not just a select few.

Incidentally, what are the odds of the SWA members also being bowhunters and trappers and the like? For the answer, look at how many anglers also hunt, and how many hunters also fish. :confused3:

Hmmmm..... And, according to the most recent membership roles, SWA has more members being an Erie County Club than NYB does across all of NYS. Tells you something, doesn't it?


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> You try to complicate everything (must be a Democrat.)
> 
> Its really quite simple:
> 
> WHY don't we allow Centerfires in MZ season?
> Not the same - They do not belong.
> 
> WHY don't we allow MZ into bowseason?
> Not the same - They do not belong.
> 
> Why don't we allow xbow into bow season?
> Not the same - They do not belong.
> 
> 
> If you feel the urge to hunt in bowseason, get off your fat and lazy butt and hunt with a bow. Otherwise, sit there and be quiet.


Source, when are the facts going to sink in?

Go examine the History of Hunting for the answers, or simply search through the myriad of posts on the subject.

Your selective amnesia is tiresome at best.... You know not what you speak about. 

You know.... Murphy not only came up with some fantasitc Laws, he also developed some lesser known dictums.... like

Light travels faster than sound.... That's why some people seem bright until you hear them speak.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> more word games-the sign of someone who cannot think logically
> 
> why do we allow lever action rifles to hunt with bolt action rifles-
> because they basically are the same


OK so far .......



Jim C said:


> why do we allow compound bows to hunt with recurve bows even though the learning curve is vastly different-because once you master one, the range is essentially the same


LOL .....:chortle: 
I see you changed the criteria....and misrepresented it. (surprise, surprise)

No, Jim. We allow compound bows because the are evolved BOWS. PERIOD.

A .44 Magnum lever gun's range is not even close to that of a .257 WBY, yet (AS YOU SAY) we allow them because they are basically the same. I guess that proves that similar range isn't the criteria.:tongue: 

Moving on ...... 



Jim C said:


> crossbows are far closer to compound bows in learning and operation (look through a peep sight-pull a trigger) than compounds are to bare bows.
> IN terms of range, power and accuracy, you cannot make an argument that crossbows have any advantage that remotely matters


 
Far closer in operation? HEEEEEEEE - HAWWWWW! You get the donkey award!

They are FAR closer to a GUN in operation, and you, I, and EVERYONE is absolutely aware of it. They don't call 'em stringgun or crossgun for nothing.

Your comparison of looking through a scope and pulling the trigger (xbow? Gun?) and having to draw back a bow string to an anchor point before you can acquire a 2nd dimension of sights is TOTALLY laughable!

It must be a joke - and a VERY funny one at that! 



Jim C said:


> as to your comment about me being lazy in my archery-it just shows how truly ignorant you are. -and unlike you, there are plenty of people who can vouch for me on this board


If the shoe fits, wear it. I know you and your ilk will not be hunting in the vast majority of the country unless you use a bow. Not to shoot at spots, cause who cares?....to shoot at deer.


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> I represent all sportsmen, Source. Not one faction over another.
> 
> When you're in a position such as I, you listen to all, not just a select few.
> 
> Incidentally, what are the odds of the SWA members also being bowhunters and trappers and the like? For the answer, look at how many anglers also hunt, and how many hunters also fish. :confused3:
> 
> Hmmmm..... And, according to the most recent membership roles, SWA has more members being an Erie County Club than NYB does across all of NYS. Tells you something, doesn't it?


Are you suggesting that Walleye fisherman should have a greater say in bowhunting matters than bowhunters? 

No, I'm pretty sure noone would be stupid enough to suggest that....


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> Light travels faster than sound.... That's why some people seem bright until you hear them speak.



Some people think they are extremely important, too.

Life has a way of humbling such idiots.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> OK so far .......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Far closer in operation? HEEEEEEEE - HAWWWWW! You get the donkey award!
> 
> They are FAR closer to a GUN in operation, and you, I, and EVERYONE is absolutely aware of it. They don't call 'em stringgun or crossgun for nothing.
> 
> Your comparison of looking through a scope and pulling the trigger (xbow? Gun?) and having to draw back a bow string to an anchor point before you can acquire a 2nd dimension of sights is TOTALLY laughable!
> 
> It must be a joke - and a VERY funny one at that!
> 
> 
> 
> If the shoe fits, wear it. I know you and your ilk will not be hunting in the vast majority of the country unless you use a bow. Not to shoot at spots, cause who cares?....to shoot at deer.


Lets see source

List all the trophies you have taken with a compound bow
List all the trophies you have taken with a crossbow
list all the trophies you have taken with a recurve bow

Then list how many archers you have say put on the world team, USAT, JR USAT or JOAD OLympian Team in recurve and compound

Then we will talk about the skills needed to shoot a compound bow, a crossbow and a recurve bow

shooting a bow is shooting a bow. If it weren't then bowhunters wouldn't shoot at spots or foam to practice


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Lets see source
> 
> List all the trophies you have taken with a compound bow
> List all the trophies you have taken with a crossbow
> list all the trophies you have taken with a recurve bow


First you would need to define trophy. Then I would decline, because I believe it is unseemly to gloat about such things.

Native Americans believed that deer (and other creatures) offered their spirits to you, enabling your success.

It would be quite arrogant to believe that only your individual skill enabled the events that led to taking any deer, let alone any deer that you are especially proud of.



Jim C said:


> Then list how many archers you have say put on the world team, USAT, JR USAT or JOAD OLympian Team in recurve and compound


Wait, let me check ........

Nope. I still don't give a flying damn about organized archery.

Bowhunting, however, I do care about. I have mentored 14 people so far into the ranks of bowhunter, and counting. (and that doesn't include those I have had in bowhunter's safety). How many have you brought totally into the license buying, ethically responsible, can't wait until October bowhunting fold?



Jim C said:


> Then we will talk about the skills needed to shoot a compound bow, a crossbow and a recurve bow


Let's talk. I have killed deer with a compound, a recurve, and at less than 20 yards with a shotgun. I am fully conversant in all we need to discuss.




Jim C said:


> shooting a bow is shooting a bow. If it weren't then bowhunters wouldn't shoot at spots or foam to practice


I agree. Holding, drawing, anchoring, aimimg. and releasing is shooting a bow whether your target has fur or ethafoam.

Oops. We seem to be missing something here with regards to your crossbow...LOL


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> First you would need to define trophy. Then I would decline, because I believe it is unseemly to gloat about such things.
> 
> Native Americans believed that deer (and other creatures) offered their spirits to you, enabling your success.
> 
> It would be quite arrogant to believe that only your individual skill enabled the events that led to taking any deer, let alone any deer that you are especially proud of.


I realize that myth and religion plays a large role in most of your posts on this subject. I tend to go with facts and logic myself





thesource said:


> Wait, let me check ........
> 
> Nope. I still don't give a flying damn about organized archery.
> 
> Bowhunting, however, I do care about. I have mentored 14 people so far into the ranks of bowhunter, and counting. (and that doesn't include those I have had in bowhunter's safety). How many have you brought totally into the license buying, ethically responsible, can't wait until October bowhunting fold?



so you say-I have no way of ascertaining whether that is true or not. I have taught hundreds of people how to shoot a bow accurately. Many of those went on to bowhunt. I don't keep track




thesource said:


> Let's talk. I have killed deer with a compound, a recurve, and at less than 20 yards with a shotgun. I am fully conversant in all we need to discuss.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. Holding, drawing, anchoring, aimimg. and releasing is shooting a bow whether your target has fur or ethafoam.
> 
> Oops. We seem to be missing something here with regards to your crossbow...LOL


of course you are missing something because you have no clue of what you are talking about. We release a crossbow string the same way 95% of compound archers release a compound string. follow through, range estimation, aiming-very similar. getting the deer within bow range-same
drawing or lifting the bow so the deer doesn't see you-again basically the same


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I realize that myth and religion plays a large role in most of your posts on this subject. I tend to go with facts and logic myself


LOL - I am a facts and logic guy, too .... engineers tend to be.

Hunting is not stats and figures. You should try to get in touch with nature on a deeper and more personal level....very rewarding. I can recommend some very good books on Native American hunting customs, if you would like.

By the way - none of them mention crossbows.



Jim C said:


> so you say-I have no way of ascertaining whether that is true or not. I have taught hundreds of people how to shoot a bow accurately. Many of those went on to bowhunt. I don't keep track


No.
That's not the same. I have taught many more to shoot a bow. Some went on to become spotties...so what?

I am asking how many you have MENTORED to become actual, no kidding, can't live without it bowhunters as their primary purpose of learning to shoot a bow well. You must be able to realize the difference.

I have mentored (and continue to mentor) 14. What I am asking is how many have you taken to this level?






Jim C said:


> of course you are missing something because you have no clue of what you are talking about. We release a crossbow string the same way 95% of compound archers release a compound string. follow through, range estimation, aiming-very similar. getting the deer within bow range-same
> drawing or lifting the bow so the deer doesn't see you-again basically the same



LOL.

You are a very funny JOKE. 

There is nothing remotely similar to pulling the trigger on a crossbow and shooting a compound bow except that a feathered projectile comes flying off it.


Shooting a crossbow is 100% similar to something though - shooting a gun.

Shoulder it. Settle in on the cheekpiece. Look through that scope, settle the crosshairs behind the shoulder. Flip off the safety. Take in a breath and let half of it out......gently squeeeeeeeeeze the trigger.

BOOM! or is it TWANG. Either way, the process was identical, and has nothing to do with archery skills.

Like I said - what a joke.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL - I am a facts and logic guy, too .... engineers tend to be.
> 
> Hunting is not stats and figures. You should try to get in touch with nature on a deeper and more personal level....very rewarding. I can recommend some very good books on Native American hunting customs, if you would like.
> 
> By the way - none of them mention crossbows.


I couldn't care less-my ancestors came from countries where educated people hunted with crossbows-England, Germany and Sweden. Whose to say my ancestors hunting heritage was inferior to Native Americans? Their military heritage was certainly far superior:wink: 





thesource said:


> No.
> That's not the same. I have taught many more to shoot a bow. Some went on to become spotties...so what?
> 
> I am asking how many you have MENTORED to become actual, no kidding, can't live without it bowhunters as their primary purpose of learning to shoot a bow well. You must be able to realize the difference.


so you say-we have no proof. Bowhunting isn't a religion for me source-its a recreational activity that I enjoy. I am a well rounded person-I have many ways to entertain myself. Maybe that's why I don't try to impose my way of approaching a recreational activity on others-I am not obsessed with it











thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> You are a very funny JOKE.
> 
> There is nothing remotely similar to pulling the trigger on a crossbow and shooting a compound bow except that a feathered projectile comes flying off it.


I am a NFAA MASTER Coach in compound archery and a many time state crossbow champion. I don't think you are in any position to dispute me on this issue and you are completely and totally wrong but you are too ignorant to understand that. List your credentials in compound and crossbow archery and we will talk-assuming there are some. RIght now I see a big ZERO in that department. 




thesource said:


> Shooting a crossbow is 100% as something though - shooting a gun.
> 
> Shoulder it. Settle in on the cheekpiece. Look through that scope, settle the crosshairs behind the shoulder. Flip off the safety. Take in a breath and let half of it out......gently squeeeeeeeeeze the trigger.
> 
> BOOM! or is it TWANG. Either way, the process was identical, and has nothing to do with archery skills.
> 
> Like I said - what a joke.


YOu prove you are ignorant again. You also prove that you don't have the mental ability to absorb information when its been given to you. Forrest Gump's favorite quote seems appropriate here


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> so you say-we have no proof. Bowhunting isn't a religion for me source-its a recreational activity that I enjoy. I am a well rounded person-I have many ways to entertain myself. Maybe that's why I don't try to impose my way of approaching a recreational activity on others-I am not obsessed with it


Super.

No one here has stated that bowhunting need be as important to you as it is to them.

That does not change the fact that we are concerned about protecting and growing BOWHUNTING.

I asked you a direct question and I expect a direct answer. How many bowhunters have you mentored to bowhunting maturity?

I expect you will dodge that question again, and I also expect that anyone reading will understand what the truth is.

I also expect that the difference between a spotshooting expert and a real bowhunter will become glaringly apparent to all who read this.




Jim C said:


> I am a NFAA MASTER Coach in compound archery and a many time state crossbow champion. I don't think you are in any position to dispute me on this issue and you are completely and totally wrong but you are too ignorant to understand that. List your credentials in compound and crossbow archery and we will talk-assuming there are some. RIght now I see a big ZERO in that department.


LOL ... so what? The only person who gives a dump is you.

I have shot a crossbow at 40 and 50 yards, and I have shot a smoothbore shotgun at 40 and 50 yards.

The accuracy leader in the clubhouse is the crossbow. 

Since I am a bowhunter, I also know what its like to shoot at 40 and 50 yards with a compound. too.

It ain't the same.

I know everything I need to know. You are a liar, the words you post here are fabricated, you intentionally misrepresent the crossbows abilities and advantages for political gain.

How's that for straight shootin'?:tongue: 




Jim C said:


> YOu prove you are ignorant again. You also prove that you don't have the mental ability to absorb information when its been given to you. Forrest Gump's favorite quote seems appropriate here


LOL.

You ignore the fact that the procedure to shoot gun and crossbow is identical and resort to personal attacks.

I don't have to say anything - you have exposed yourself.


----------



## Jim C

source-I claim there are major differences between a crossbow and a shotgun or a rifle

I have years of experience and a proven record

You don't

your claims contradict mine and I believe you are lying

You are obsessived with denigrating crossbows and your posting history indicates that your only reason for coming to AT was to whine about xbows. Thus I believe you would lie to advance your agenda because no one here knows you and you have no reputation in archery at stake-unlike me where I am well known in archery circles to dozens and dozens of people on this board. If I say a lie or make a claim I can't back up-there are people here I will have to answer to

Not so with you. you have nothing that serves as a check on your claims or your statements. I think you are lying and that is based on my years of experience


----------



## thesource

What a pathetic joke.

You are falling back on your lame "archery credibility" alibi in place of having the stones to take the incoming fire.

You STILL haven't answered how many bowhunters you have mentored to complete maturity in the sport. I expect the answer is absolutely none. I think that if you want to claim you are helping bowhunting, you are missing a very important part of the job description.



Jim C said:


> source-I claim there are major differences between a crossbow and a shotgun or a rifle


OK - so what? Where did I say otherwise. Here's what I said:



thesource said:


> You ignore the fact that the procedure to shoot gun and crossbow is identical and resort to personal attacks.


Which you have done again.

I claimed the procedure to shoot guns and crossbows are the same, you answer that there are major differences between them and ignore the shooting part.

You may _think _I'm lying, but I *KNOW * and just proved you are intentionally misdirecting and misrepresenting. Thats dishonest - which means you have proven yourself dishonest.

Remember that credibility you love to throw around - POOF - its all gone.


----------



## JavaMan

I wonder if Mr Source is ever going to grow up and realize archery is a recreational sport and how absurd it is to try to restrict someone from participating in a recreational sport the way or ways they would like, especially when that choice or choices does not compromise the enjoyment of others. Crossbow procedure and firearm procedure is not the same-but even if it was-so what? I note crossbows far predated firearms.

when you got a mental problem I guess it is hard to realize that.

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> What a pathetic joke.
> 
> You are falling back on your lame "archery credibility" alibi in place of having the stones to take the incoming fire.
> 
> You STILL haven't answered how many bowhunters you have mentored to complete maturity in the sport. I expect the answer is absolutely none. I think that if you want to claim you are helping bowhunting, you are missing a very important part of the job description.
> 
> 
> 
> OK - so what? Where did I say otherwise. Here's what I said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which you have done again.
> 
> I claimed the procedure to shoot guns and crossbows are the same, you answer that there are major differences between them and ignore the shooting part.
> 
> You may _think _I'm lying, but I *KNOW * and just proved you are intentionally misdirecting and misrepresenting. Thats dishonest - which means you have proven yourself dishonest.
> 
> Remember that credibility you love to throw around - POOF - its all gone.



more stupidity from the source. In shooting a firearm you don't have to worry about

1) trajectory at most deer range targets
2) clearing branches
3) cocking the weapon properly
4) precise shot placement-you can kill a deer from almost any angle with a shotgun
5) range estimation
6) follow through with a crossbow is far more important
7) raising the weapon without being seen due to the usual distances
8) second shot-tell me mr source-what is the "procedure" for shooting a shotgun or rifle a second time vs a crossbow-are you still braying they are the same

What is really idiotic is that you whine that target shooting is not the same as bowhunting (which is true) but then you fixate on the "target shooting" part of bowhunting (a deer is a target) exclusively and ignore all the other skills WHICH ARE EXACTLY THE SAME for both compound and crossbow hunters in an attempt to exclude crossbows and force them into gun hunting seasons

your rantings have long ago become a pathetic joke source and your obsession is obviously spinning out of control. Your braying about teaching people to hunt is worrisome if you have infected them with the same disease you have concerning other people's choice of bow


----------



## Marvin

JavaMan said:


> I wonder if Mr Source is ever going to grow up and realize archery is a recreational sport and how absurd it is to try to restrict someone from participating in a recreational sport the way or ways they would like, especially when that choice or choices does not compromise the enjoyment of others. Crossbow procedure and firearm procedure is not the same-but even if it was-so what? I note crossbows far predated firearms.
> 
> when you got a mental problem I guess it is hard to realize that.
> 
> JavaMan


Enough Dougie. Its getting old. we obvously know you know your way around the system. Be forwarned. Keep it up and you'll end up like the rest of your sock puppets. You'va already threatened him once I'd say you better step away before it goes too far.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> more stupidity from the source. In shooting a firearm you don't have to worry about
> 
> 1) trajectory at most deer range targets *misdirection*
> 2) clearing branches*misdirection*
> 
> 3) cocking the weapon properly*misdirection*
> 
> 4) precise shot placement-you can kill a deer from almost any angle with a shotgun*misdirection*
> 
> 5) range estimation*misdirection*
> 
> 6) follow through with a crossbow is far more important*misrepresentation*
> 
> 7) raising the weapon without being seen due to the usual distances*untruth*
> 
> 8) second shot-tell me mr source-what is the "procedure" for shooting a shotgun or rifle a second time vs a crossbow-are you still braying they are the same*misdirection*


LOL, mr credibility....that would be LOADING....SHOOTING is still exactly the same. DUH

You have misdirected or misrepresented ALL of the above. Try again. The shooting procedures of gun and crossbow are the same - both are totally different than real bows. 

Take another swing, if you want....




Jim C said:


> What is really idiotic is that you whine that target shooting is not the same as bowhunting (which is true) but then you fixate on the "target shooting" part of bowhunting*misdirection...we were talking about shooting, period*(a deer is a target) exclusively and ignore all the other skills WHICH ARE EXACTLY THE SAME for both compound and crossbow hunters in an attempt to exclude crossbows and force them into gun hunting seasons*misdirection - short range hunting skills are a different subject....even gun hunters can have that skillset. Your use of the phrase "EXACTLY THE SAME" is another UNTRUTH. Since you need not draw in the presence, for example, there is no possible way you can reasonably suggest that it is identical. caught again.*


----------



## JavaMan

Marvin

sorry but I am not this person. I am one of those 8000 views who found this entertaining thread.

its amusing watching a guy who is totally ignorant on archery and firearms for that matter to continue to post. He compares a crossbow to a gun vs a conventional bow but as is consistant with his ignorance he overlooks that crossbows in IBO competition post lower scores than compounds. Now, if anyone competed with a scope sighted .223 rifle and was able to compare those scores vs compound scores I think there would be a difference.

I also note inspite of being claimed a "chemical engineer" this guy never seems to be on the job. He was just on this site at 9am his time. Maybe his obsession carries over to work, but I don't believe he really works at all. He already lies about being a bowhunter and so much more.

JavaMan


----------



## BigBirdVA

I see we're still at it.


----------



## Marvin

JavaMan said:


> Marvin
> 
> sorry but I am not this person. I am one of those 8000 views who found this entertaining thread.
> 
> its amusing watching a guy who is totally ignorant on archery and firearms for that matter to continue to post. He compares a crossbow to a gun vs a conventional bow but as is consistant with his ignorance he overlooks that crossbows in IBO competition post lower scores than compounds. Now, if anyone competed with a scope sighted .223 rifle and was able to compare those scores vs compound scores I think there would be a difference.
> 
> I also note inspite of being claimed a "chemical engineer" this guy never seems to be on the job. He was just on this site at 9am his time. Maybe his obsession carries over to work, but I don't believe he really works at all. He already lies about being a bowhunter and so much more.
> 
> JavaMan



Doug, switch tactics. you only waited a mear 4 posts before bashing. I guess that beats one like your SteveB handle. Too funny. You not even smart enough to change your approach.


----------



## thesource

Right, as usual Marvin.

Same rhetoric. Same stupid analogies. Same boring and redundant insults. Same lapdog to JimC antics.

Same old Doug.


----------



## Free Range

> By Jim
> so you say-I have no way of ascertaining whether that is true or not. I have taught hundreds of people how to shoot a bow accurately. Many of those went on to bowhunt. I don't keep track


This Source is a very telling statement. Notice he dodged the direct question you asked him. Again he tries to take credit, or connect two events that may or may not be connected. Just as they do with surveys, and so called data. He has taught people how to shoot a bow, and some have become bowhunters, it is possible that all those that did become bowhunters would have without learning how to shoot from the great JimC. You on the other hand have directly involved people in bowhunting, and directly helped many get their bow hunting license. Kudos to you Source and keep up the good work. :cocktail: 



> I couldn't care less-my ancestors came from countries where educated people hunted with crossbows-England, Germany and Sweden. Whose to say my ancestors hunting heritage was inferior to Native Americans? Their military heritage was certainly far superior



Nice,, what is that saying again,,,,, something about a skunk showing it’s strips. :tongue: 




> By JavaMan (doug)
> I wonder if Mr Source is ever going to grow up and realize archery is a recreational sport


Actually Dou,,,,ah JavaMan, we did a poll here on AT and the (how does Ace put it) the fast majority think bowhunting is more then a recreational activity. Now that is fine if bowhunting is to you the same as bowling, but to most of us it’s a bit more then that. :wink: 



> its amusing watching a guy who is totally ignorant on archery and firearms for that matter to continue to post. He compares a crossbow to a gun vs a conventional bow but as is consistant with his ignorance he overlooks that crossbows in IBO competition post lower scores than compounds. Now, if anyone competed with a scope sighted .223 rifle and was able to compare those scores vs compound scores I think there would be a difference.



Actually Dou,, ah Javaman, I haven’t seen you post anything except to insult Source, do you know anything about archery. I can’t remember where I saw this but I saw a demonstration once of a guy out shooting a 22 rifle with a bow, I would think there is much more to target archery then the kind of weapon you are shooting. Probably has something to do with the ability to hold something steady from a static position, (gun or xb) and holding from a dynamitic position (a bow). But that is just guess work on my part, you see I’m a hunter and have never taken any “formal” shooting leasons.


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> Right, as usual Marvin.
> 
> Same rhetoric. Same stupid analogies. Same boring and redundant insults. Same lapdog to JimC antics.
> 
> Same old Doug.


yeah he is getting pretty good about the multiple handle thing. Wonder when he's gonna come down and punch you in the mouth? I cannot believe you did not report him. Sounds like a terrorist to me.


----------



## Free Range

I just want to take a minute to thank the mods for letting this go this long. I guess it’s a good way to keep us crack pots in one place, easier to keep an eye on us that way. :darkbeer:


----------



## BigBirdVA

Free Range said:


> I just want to take a minute to thank the mods for letting this go this long. I guess it’s a good way to keep us crack pots in one place, easier to keep an eye on us that way. :darkbeer:


At least you know where you stand. Congrats on finally getting something right.


----------



## Marvin

BigBirdVA said:


> At least you know where you stand. Congrats on finally getting something right.


Heck all we need is twogun to show up and stir the pot a little more and we will have the whole gang. Its like a little rascal's reunion I tell you


----------



## JavaMan

sorry but not the same person. I don't know what you are talking about. Given Mr Source's deranged ramblings and obsession it wouldn't surprise me if he writes threatening messages though. 

FreeRange

what a poll on AT says or doesn't say hardly matters. Even if a majority felt archery/bowhunting where focal points of their lives the simply reality is it is a recreational sport. People can take a recreational sport seriously, that I have no doubt, but it remains a recreational sport.

JavaMan


----------



## Marvin

JavaMan said:


> sorry but not the same person. I don't know what you are talking about. Given Mr Source's deranged ramblings and obsession it wouldn't surprise me if he writes threatening messages though.
> 
> FreeRange
> 
> what a poll on AT says or doesn't say hardly matters. Even if a majority felt archery/bowhunting where focal points of their lives the simply reality is it is a recreational sport. People can take a recreational sport seriously, that I have no doubt, but it remains a recreational sport.
> 
> JavaMan


Man up doug and at least have the courage to use your real handle. I know thats above you but try real hard.


----------



## dalebow

You guys are cracking me up...so who gives a rats as$ who got what, its set in stone for the time being, we all can have an opinion but its like as$ holes we all got one, you all act like you really make a difference. Mike put the time and effort in to make a difference, who was for a comprimise from the get go, he was against all x-gunx, ballard and others have invested time and money to get what we have...give it a freakin rest and hunt. Ive already got 2 nice velvet bucks patterned and awaiting my arrow come September:wink: 

Ive said it before and I will say it again, I dont agree with x-guns but they got more season so let them have it, xx-gunners get a life and quit arguing over the past.....If I see ya in the woods and you need help dragging a deer I will help and hope the favor is returned....Momma always said dont bring up religion or politics:darkbeer:


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> Are you suggesting that Walleye fisherman should have a greater say in bowhunting matters than bowhunters?
> 
> No, I'm pretty sure noone would be stupid enough to suggest that....


I am saying hunters have a say in hunting, anglers have a say in angling. And those who do both have a say in both.

Methinks Source is of the erroneous belief that members of Southtowns Walleye Association only belong to SWA. And members of NYB are only members of NYB.

How many organizations does the source belong to?

How many do involved and educated sportsmen belong to?

Your ignorance has been completely exposed source. This is a condition that YOU and only YOU can correct. Join some clubs, ATTEND THE MEETINGS (the first few meetings it is advisable to keep your opinions and observations to yourself until you get some knowledge and understanding of what is truly reality, as you do not want to alienate yourself at meeting number one through expressing ignorant remarks).

Once you have gotten some insight and understanding (meaning, getting an education) then by all means you may voice your concerns, opinions, beliefs, make motions, propose resolutions, vote on matters, etc.

But, before you can progress source, you really need to get educated. That is your #1 need, and it is your responsibility to seek out knowledge and get educated.

You'll be a much happier hunter for it. You may not change your opinion, which is fine. But at least you will be able to debate in a more intelligent fashion.


----------



## Free Range

> what a poll on AT says or doesn't say hardly matters. Even if a majority felt archery/bowhunting where focal points of their lives the simply reality is it is a recreational sport. People can take a recreational sport seriously, that I have no doubt, but it remains a recreational sport.


I see, it doesn’t matter what EVERYBODY else thinks, your definition is all that counts? Lets see, I could go bowling or hunting? I could throw a gutter ball or wound a deer? It’s all the same to you? Really you once a year hunters should stay out of debates concerning real hunting, and keep to the target archery threads. :zip:


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> I am saying hunters have a say in hunting, anglers have a say in angling. And those who do both have a say in both.
> 
> Methinks Source is of the erroneous belief that members of Southtowns Walleye Association only belong to SWA. And members of NYB are only members of NYB.


No, Rich, the source understands that hunters join hunting orgs and anglers join fishing orgs. I also understand if you expect a say in hunting matters that hunting orgs should hold more sway than fishing orgs. And I understand that if a sportsmen is a member of both groups, and both groups have equal sway, than said sportsmen is actually being double counted.

Quit trying to put lipstick on this pig, Rich. Fisherman should have ZERO say in bowhunting matters. If they are fisherman who bowhunt, they should be members of a bowhunting organization that will represent their interests.




doctariAFC said:


> How many organizations does the source belong to?


LOL - is it a contest?
I belong to as many organizations as I want, and only support those who represent my interests. I do not feel any need to boast and brag by listing all of the organizations I am member to or associated with, or the positions that I may hold within them. 

I feel that others who do lack class and a proper sense of perspective and place.



doctariAFC said:


> But, before you can progress source, you really need to get educated. That is your #1 need, and it is your responsibility to seek out knowledge and get educated. You'll be a much happier hunter for it. You may not change your opinion, which is fine. But at least you will be able to debate in a more intelligent fashion.


Thanks for the advice. I'll take it under consideration.

I think your #1 need is humility, followed by a very large dose of reality.

Your anti-government, anarchist, paranoid ranting should be addressed, the sooner the better. You will be a much happier person for it.


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> No, Rich, the source understands that hunters join hunting orgs and anglers join fishing orgs. I also understand if you expect a say in hunting matters that hunting orgs should hold more sway than fishing orgs. And I understand that if a sportsmen is a member of both groups, and both groups have equal sway, than said sportsmen is actually being double counted.


That's part of your lack of understanding. The outdoors belongs to everyone not just a few within a group that have laid claim to it. The way it's used is to benefit the maximum number without doing harm. Since every xbow study has proven time and time again it's zero impact your point is proven invalid. So we're back again to square one with you or to be more precise, your inability to comprehend the big picture.


----------



## Free Range

And just what is that “Big Picture” BigBird? We all know you guys want one season any weapon, limit the number of tags, or days afield, and there is no harm to the resource, right? We also know that you could care less about bow hunting, bow hunting is not about impact to the resource it’s about impact on the soul of hunter, it’s about so much more then you and the rest of the “game management” blow-hards can or will ever understand. But if all you understand is game management and bowling then that’s fine, just step aside and let those that care about bowhunting work out what is best for our sport. There is plenty of room for all users of the outdoors, it just doesn’t have to all be at the same time.


----------



## thesource

BigBirdVA said:


> That's part of your lack of understanding. The outdoors belongs to everyone not just a few within a group that have laid claim to it. The way it's used is to benefit the maximum number without doing harm. Since every xbow study has proven time and time again it's zero impact your point is proven invalid. So we're back again to square one with you or to be more precise, your inability to comprehend the big picture.



How very Liberal sounding. Only you "enlightened" crossbowers understand the big picture...LOL.

Please explain to me why a walleye fisherman has any right whatsoever to influence NY bowhunting regulations......

And think about the possible repercussions with your "outdoors belongs to everyone" rhetoric.


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> How very Liberal sounding. Only you "enlightened" crossbowers understand the big picture...LOL.
> 
> Please explain to me why a walleye fisherman has any right whatsoever to influence NY bowhunting regulations......
> 
> And think about the possible repercussions with your "outdoors belongs to everyone" rhetoric.


You are kidding right? Just fooling I know you're totally in the dark on this. The state owns the wildlife not you or some guy fishing for Walleye. Priority #1 is to protect the future of wildlife. #2 recreation in the form of hunting, fishing and all other outdoor activities. They are allowed because it does not harm #1 or in the case of hunting it helps manage game. Since no where has xbow hunting ever been found to cause a problem it's being allowed. Since you're obviously not paying attention how the hell do you think the AR types are pushing their agenda? It's because any state owned property is owned by all - including wild animals - and since they are part owner it can be manipulated by any group that can prove their point. Xbows have proved their's - the anti's haven't.


----------



## thesource

First of all, let's get this straight - the only one talking about crossbows right now is you.

I am talking about the larger philosophy that you appear to espouse.

I am totally supportive of the state's ownership of the wildlife (and this is a big reason I oppose high fences, for example.) That gives the state the right to manage the wildlife. We're on the same page so far. While there certainly is a public opinion aspect to state control of anything, that isn't what the issue you butted into was about.

We're talking about a federation of sportsmens' groups that has a role in advising the NY DEC about regulations. And that within this particular federation, a Walleye Fisherman's org has the largest voting block.

Why should the a) federation b) NYSCC and c) NY DEC give a flying turd what a walleye group thinks NY bowhunting regulations should be?

Let's turn the tables. Why should NYB have any influence over the minimum legal length a walleye should be when caught in Lake Erie tributaries?

Its just stupid.


----------



## JavaMan

Mr Source

don't you have a job to do?


Bla-bla-bla

JavaMan


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> First of all, let's get this straight - the only one talking about crossbows right now is you.
> 
> I am talking about the larger philosophy that you appear to espouse.
> 
> I am totally supportive of the state's ownership of the wildlife (and this is a big reason I oppose high fences, for example.) That gives the state the right to manage the wildlife. We're on the same page so far. While there certainly is a public opinion aspect to state control of anything, that isn't what the issue you butted into was about.
> 
> We're talking about a federation of sportsmens' groups that has a role in advising the NY DEC about regulations. And that within this particular federation, a Walleye Fisherman's org has the largest voting block.
> 
> Why should the a) federation b) NYSCC and c) NY DEC give a flying turd what a walleye group thinks NY bowhunting regulations should be?
> 
> Let's turn the tables. Why should NYB have any influence over the minimum legal length a walleye should be when caught in Lake Erie tributaries?
> 
> Its just stupid.


Uh......... wasn't the word crossbow mentioned in the first post on this thread? You brought it up a post or two back and now suddenly it's not on topic anymore. LOL! Sorry it's part of the topic. I know when it doesn't go your way you would like it to just disappear but that isn't going to happen.


----------



## Marvin

BigBirdVA said:


> Uh......... wasn't the word crossbow mentioned in the first post on this thread? You brought it up a post or two back and now suddenly it's not on topic anymore. LOL! Sorry it's part of the topic. I know when it doesn't go your way you would like it to just disappear but that isn't going to happen.


Hey it looks like the christian nazi got our thread BBVA . Whats up with that? that crossbow forum should be about everyone's knowledge not just some elite group....We all should have a say what goes on in there...elitests I tell you.


----------



## thesource

BigBirdVA said:


> Uh......... wasn't the word crossbow mentioned in the first post on this thread? You brought it up a post or two back and now suddenly it's not on topic anymore. LOL! Sorry it's part of the topic. I know when it doesn't go your way you would like it to just disappear but that isn't going to happen.



LOL....

I'll type REAL slow so you understand.

The conversation you barged in on was about representation of NY sportsmen. My response to you was in regards to that, and your philosophy about citizen's representation. Not crossbows...duh.

I see you conveniently ignored my response and my questions to focus on crossbows and pot stirring.

Typical.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL, mr credibility....that would be LOADING....SHOOTING is still exactly the same. DUH
> 
> You have misdirected or misrepresented ALL of the above. Try again. The shooting procedures of gun and crossbow are the same - both are totally different than real bows.
> 
> Take another swing, if you want....



wow, loading a firearm-which takes almost no physical effort is the same as a crossbow? the stupidity continues. I can load a shotgun in a tree stand with no effort. Try cocking (which is an essential part of loading) a crossbow in the same position or in a tight ground blind. Thanks source-proving again you are clueless


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> And just what is that “Big Picture” BigBird? We all know you guys want one season any weapon, limit the number of tags, or days afield, and there is no harm to the resource, right? We also know that you could care less about bow hunting, bow hunting is not about impact to the resource it’s about impact on the soul of hunter, it’s about so much more then you and the rest of the “game management” blow-hards can or will ever understand. But if all you understand is game management and bowling then that’s fine, just step aside and let those that care about bowhunting work out what is best for our sport. There is plenty of room for all users of the outdoors, it just doesn’t have to all be at the same time.



YOur narrow concern of what is best for the sport is a code word for justifying you self image issues and your desire not to have anyone else in the woods if possible. We see through your bs and we know what motivates you and your ilk


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> wow, loading a firearm-which takes almost no physical effort is the same as a crossbow? the stupidity continues. I can load a shotgun in a tree stand with no effort. Try cocking (which is an essential part of loading) a crossbow in the same position or in a tight ground blind. Thanks source-proving again you are clueless


i can do that easily...its no large feet to cock a crossbow in a treestand. I got 3 shots off at one rut crazed buck. wish i had got that sucker.


----------



## JavaMan

JimC

I do have a question for you. in your considered opinion do you think you could shoot as tight a group at 50 yards with a crossbow as you could with a small bore rifle?

on a 3D course competing against David Cousins armed with a bow and yourself with a small bore scope sighted rifle, do you think you could compete and even beat him?

now, if we changed your equipment to a crossbow, would you still be competitive?

Mr Source compares a crossbow to a firearm, but I would appreciate a knowledgeable and informed opinion.

thank you

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> i can do that easily...its no large feet to cock a crossbow in a treestand. I got 3 shots off at one rut crazed buck. wish i had got that sucker.



depends on your size and strength and the weight of the bow. No one is going to argue (save perhaps the source but that doesn't count) that loading a shotgun or rifle is anyway the same as a crossbow


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> depends on your size and strength and the weight of the bow. No one is going to argue (save perhaps the source but that doesn't count) that loading a shotgun or rifle is anyway the same as a crossbow


Agreed, but don't paint it with a broad brush either. there is enough half truths out there. Is your sock puppet detector flickering or is it just mine?


----------



## Jim C

Marvin said:


> Agreed, but don't paint it with a broad brush either. there is enough half truths out there. Is your sock puppet detector flickering or is it just mine?


See PM


----------



## thesource

Are you INTENTIONALLY trying to make yourself look like an idiot? 

I said:


thesource said:


> LOL, mr credibility....that would be LOADING....SHOOTING is still exactly the same. DUH


And you say:


Jim C said:


> wow, loading a firearm-which takes almost no physical effort is the same as a crossbow? the stupidity continues.


Do you need a TUTOR? I am talking about SHOOTING. You keep changing the subject to loading.... MISREPRESENTATION? I think you have become the definition....

DUUUHHHHHHHHH!


----------



## thesource

Marvin said:


> Agreed, but don't paint it with a broad brush either. there is enough half truths out there. Is your sock puppet detector flickering or is it just mine?





Jim C said:


> See PM


I consider this another blemish on your character. The fact that you do not call out a known violator, banned on multiple occasions, irregardless of his lefty crossbow leanings is a clear indication that you are an agenda driven radical.


It is already clear that you will misrepresent and misdirect for your cause. I find the fact that you do not have enough principle to tell the 7 times banned Doug to crawl back under his rock quite telling.

Any port in a storm, eh Jim?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Are you INTENTIONALLY trying to make yourself look like an idiot?
> 
> I said:
> 
> 
> And you say:
> 
> 
> Do you need a TUTOR? I am talking about SHOOTING. You keep changing the subject to loading.... MISREPRESENTATION? I think you have become the definition....
> 
> DUUUHHHHHHHHH!



shooting is different too clueless one. You don't have to worry about limb clearance with a shotgun. cant doesn't matter either at normal hunting ranges


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I consider this another blemish on your character. The fact that you do not call out a known violator, banned on multiple occasions, irregardless of his lefty crossbow leanings is a clear indication that you are an agenda driven radical.
> 
> 
> It is already clear that you will misrepresent and misdirect for your cause. I find the fact that you do not have enough principle to tell the 7 times banned Doug to crawl back under his rock quite telling.
> 
> Any port in a storm, eh Jim?



I PM'd marvin because I felt like it and I don't feel a need to discuss the issue in a way that you could see it. You have no idea what I said so why don't you stuff it. I mentioned to Marvin (for reasons I WILL NOT SHARE WITH you since you don't have the standing) that I don't think its Doug.


----------



## JavaMan

Mr Source

as I said, I don't have a clue what you are talking about. And no surprise, you don't have a clue either. I've said PROVE IT.

Marv's earlier post, for your claimed threat recieved, did you write a threat first? Knowing your mental instability I suspect so.

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

JavaMan said:


> Mr Source
> 
> as I said, I don't have a clue what you are talking about. And no surprise, you don't have a clue either. I've said PROVE IT.
> 
> Marv's earlier post, for your claimed threat recieved, did you write a threat first? Knowing your mental instability I suspect so.
> 
> JavaMan



He can't. He's losing it


----------



## Free Range

> I do have a question for you. in your considered opinion do you think you could shoot as tight a group at 50 yards with a crossbow as you could with a small bore rifle?
> 
> on a 3D course competing against David Cousins armed with a bow and yourself with a small bore scope sighted rifle, do you think you could compete and even beat him?
> 
> now, if we changed your equipment to a crossbow, would you still be competitive?
> 
> Mr Source compares a crossbow to a firearm, but I would appreciate a knowledgeable and informed opinion.
> 
> thank you
> 
> JavaMan



I think I’m going to be sickukey:


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I PM'd marvin because I felt like it and I don't feel a need to discuss the issue in a way that you could see it. You have no idea what I said so why don't you stuff it. I mentioned to Marvin (for reasons I WILL NOT SHARE WITH you since you don't have the standing) that I don't think its Doug.


You are simply lying. It is obviously Doug, from his rhetoric to his insults to his kissing your butt.



JavaMan said:


> Mr Source
> 
> as I said, I don't have a clue what you are talking about. And no surprise, you don't have a clue either. I've said PROVE IT.
> 
> Marv's earlier post, for your claimed threat recieved, did you write a threat first? Knowing your mental instability I suspect so.
> 
> 
> 
> Jim C said:
> 
> 
> 
> He can't. He's losing it
Click to expand...

You KNOW it is Doug, and by failing to condemn it, you condone it.

When you see me getting flamed for chastising crossbower character, remember this.

THIS is why I hold you crossbowers in such low esteem. Some break the rules. Some look the other way. ALL are guilty.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> shooting is different too clueless one. You don't have to worry about limb clearance with a shotgun. cant doesn't matter either at normal hunting ranges


You look like a simpering fool.

SHOOTING PROCEDURE, you donkey!

You know it is the same, yet you whimper and whine and hide behind the skirts of other issues.

I have no idea what anyone else thinks of your charade, but I am repulsed. You have thrown away any credibility you think you had and stand quivering before the absolute fact that a crossbow shoots like a gun and not a bow.

You are DISMISSED.


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> LOL....
> 
> I'll type REAL slow so you understand.
> 
> The conversation you barged in on was about representation of NY sportsmen. My response to you was in regards to that, and your philosophy about citizen's representation. Not crossbows...duh.
> 
> I see you conveniently ignored my response and my questions to focus on crossbows and pot stirring.
> 
> Typical.


Uh......... the word "xbow" comes up 40 times in this thread. I didn't even look for "crossbow" Do a search. So all of a sudden it's me? LOL! I sure as heck didn't post it 40 times. And I'm slow? LOL Well even if I was at least I do finally get it. More than I can say for you. I know it's hard but please try to get your facts correct before hammering away at your KB.


----------



## JavaMan

Mr BigBirdVA

it's impossible to argue and debate with someone as mentally deranged as Mr Source appears to be.

his whole world is a mass conspiracy theory and an world view that normal people cannot imagine. What I suspect is, while he imagines himself a bowhunter-he really only just reads magazines. While he imagines himself a "chemical engineer" he really lives at home with his Mommy and Daddy or he is an out patient from a phychiatric ward.

I must say it's fun seeing him argue about a crossbow is the same as a firearm. It matters not, and firearms came far later than any crossbow. A crossbow does not shoot a bullet, does not go "bang" and allow for accuracy several 100 yards away.

I note modern compound bowhunters accept a release aid (trigger) bowsight, and peep site. The mechanics of shooting a compound bow are considerably different, and with an appreciable difference in accuracy than a traditional bow depending on human instinct to guide the arrow. Mr Source is silent on that probably because he doesn't know about it.

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

BigBirdVA said:


> Uh......... the word "xbow" comes up 40 times in this thread. I didn't even look for "crossbow" Do a search. So all of a sudden it's me? LOL! I sure as heck didn't post it 40 times. And I'm slow? LOL Well even if I was at least I do finally get it. More than I can say for you. I know it's hard but please try to get your facts correct before hammering away at your KB.



Bigbird..

You still avoid the true issue that you interupted.

I imagine that 
a) you are not actually interested in it
b) you realize you were made to look stupid and wish to change the subject

In either case, the remedy is for you to shut up and crawl back under the rock that you came from....LOL

You feel you are enlightened...good for you. I feel you have sacrificed your principles for an advantaged method. In other words, you are a sell out. We will never see eye to eye, at least on this subject.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> I think I’m going to be sickukey:


You would be sick to think you could come close to cousins with a crossbow shot under IBO rules


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You are simply lying. It is obviously Doug, from his rhetoric to his insults to his kissing your butt.
> 
> 
> 
> You KNOW it is Doug, and by failing to condemn it, you condone it.
> 
> When you see me getting flamed for chastising crossbower character, remember this.
> 
> THIS is why I hold you crossbowers in such low esteem. Some break the rules. Some look the other way. ALL are guilty.



You again are lying source. I was honest with Marvin and I do not believe its Doug for the reasons I explained to Marvin that you are not worthy enough to be informed of. I really don't care either-what he says is 100% accurate


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> You look like a simpering fool.
> 
> SHOOTING PROCEDURE, you donkey!
> 
> You know it is the same, yet you whimper and whine and hide behind the skirts of other issues.
> 
> I have no idea what anyone else thinks of your charade, but I am repulsed. You have thrown away any credibility you think you had and stand quivering before the absolute fact that a crossbow shoots like a gun and not a bow.
> 
> You are DISMISSED.


Ah personal insults from the source and you can't dismiss me-your entire reason for being on archery talk is to deal with your own mental issues involving crossbows. Maybe one day I will tell the board what I really know about you and your BS source


----------



## Marvin

Jim C said:


> I PM'd marvin because I felt like it and I don't feel a need to discuss the issue in a way that you could see it. You have no idea what I said so why don't you stuff it. I mentioned to Marvin (for reasons I WILL NOT SHARE WITH you since you don't have the standing) that I don't think its Doug.


All right you two. i will follow up in the morning. Seems like my spider senses are tingling again with dougman...... 

If java doug is still out there tell us your vast experiences. You seem to not know a lick about kentucky or what happened there but you sure know a lot about source.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> Maybe one day I will tell the board what I really know about you and your BS source



LOL......

Now that sounds like some sort of veiled threat.

What IS it with you crossbow guys?


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> You again are lying source. I was honest with Marvin and I do not believe its Doug for the reasons I explained to Marvin that you are not worthy enough to be informed of. I really don't care either-what he says is 100% accurate


Its Doug, you know it, and you agree with what he says because you tell him what to say.

Do you know what "lackey" means?

You are probably not worthy of even arguing with, now that you mention it. Take a hike.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL......
> 
> Now that sounds like some sort of veiled threat.
> 
> What IS it with you crossbow guys?



how could that be a threat source? and it won't even violate doctor patient privilege:wink:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Its Doug, you know it, and you agree with what he says because you tell him what to say.
> 
> Do you know what "lackey" means?
> 
> You are probably not worthy of even arguing with, now that you mention it. Take a hike.


poor source-you are lying again. I don't know its doug and you can't prove he is. I don't tell anyone what to say so again you are lying. As to taking a hike, lets ask the entire membership on AT who is more helpful to the members here

Me or you? you take a hike source. I was here before you were, and you have nothing to add other than an interesting case study of psychological problems that cause you to worry so much about what other people hunt with


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> . I don't know its doug and you can't prove he is. I don't tell anyone what to say so again you are lying.



Ahhhhhh.

Crossbow ethics on display. "You can't prove it" means its OK.

You guys are twisted.

I know its Doug. Marvin knows its Doug. FreeRange knows its Doug.

He uses the exact same references, the exact same insults, the exact same analogies as Doug. Doug has tried to get back on AT 7 times since he was banned, each time with a new handle but the same old M.O. - come in and spend nearly every post attacking thesource. Every time he did, they caught up with him and he got booted.

This reincarnation has the same MO and says the same things, uses the exact same rhetoric. He may have been bright enough to change his IP address, but he's still too stupid to change his game plan.

You know its DougK just as sure as the sun will come up tomorrow, yet you are willing to LIE about it to protect your crossbow flunky. This is what I have come to absolutely expect from crossbow advocates.

You both disgust me.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Ahhhhhh.
> 
> Crossbow ethics on display. "You can't prove it" means its OK.
> 
> You guys are twisted.
> 
> I know its Doug. Marvin knows its Doug. FreeRange knows its Doug.
> 
> He uses the exact same references, the exact same insults, the exact same analogies as Doug. Doug has tried to get back on AT 7 times since he was banned, each time with a new handle but the same old M.O. - come in and spend nearly every post attacking thesource. Every time he did, they caught up with him and he got booted.
> 
> This reincarnation has the same MO and says the same things, uses the exact same rhetoric. He may have been bright enough to change his IP address, but he's still too stupid to change his game plan.
> 
> You know its DougK just as sure as the sun will come up tomorrow, yet you are willing to LIE about it to protect your crossbow flunky. This is what I have come to absolutely expect from crossbow advocates.
> 
> You both disgust me.


I couldn't care less. Free range is maybe a smidgen more credible than you are. I don't know its Doug and it would be easy to copy his posting style just as it would be easy to copy your blather. IF things disgust you why not leave Source? YOu have no reason for being on AT other than to inflict your mental issues over crossbows on us.


----------



## JavaMan

I don't believe our resident imbecile will leave because this is the only attention he ever receives. Obviously the man is a failure in bowhunting, archery, and I suspect everything else in life.

Sorry, Mr Source but I am not this "Doug" person who sounds like a swell guy. Just someone who followed this discussion and decided to make some comments. Just like you.

Only difference is my comments aren't based on ignorance, and self esteem issues like yourself.

JavaMan


----------



## Seth the XSlayr

Wow, I found another train wreck on Archery Talk...





Ted Nugent

Ted Nugent

Ted Nugent




Now, all I have to do is wait for Free Speech DB to arrive after his daily search of a million posts for the content that is known as "NUGE"....


Free Speech DB & thesource need to breed one another, so they can spawn super psychotic internet forum stalker offspring & anti crossbow spammers.


----------



## spec

Three weeks ago Java your post claimed you didn't know about what happened in Ky and now your the resident expert of name-calling.


----------



## Jim C

Seth the XSlayr said:


> Wow, I found another train wreck on Archery Talk...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ted Nugent
> 
> Ted Nugent
> 
> Ted Nugent
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now, all I have to do is wait for Free Speech DB to arrive after his daily search of a million posts for the content that is known as "NUGE"....
> 
> 
> Free Speech DB & thesource need to breed one another, so they can spawn super psychotic internet forum stalker offspring & anti crossbow spammers.


    

I was thinking the same thing FSDB's main reason for AT was to whine about Nuge, Source's sole existence is to whine about xbows. When those two find out that Nuge is pro crossbow look out


----------



## Free Range

> By Jim
> You would be sick to think you could come close to cousins with a crossbow shot under IBO rules


IBO rules, let me check, nope the Marlow report didn’t mention IBO, nor did I. I do recall you backing down from a challenge. I guess you got sick? 



> By Dou,,ah Javaman
> Only difference is my comments aren't based on ignorance, and self esteem issues like yourself.
> 
> JavaMan


And just what are your comments based on? The only comment I have seen is your constant insults directed at Source, oh and your brown nosing of Jim, hope you don’t have hemorrhoids Jim, if you do they must be getting swollen by now.


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> Bigbird..
> 
> You still avoid the true issue that you interupted.
> 
> I imagine that
> a) you are not actually interested in it
> b) you realize you were made to look stupid and wish to change the subject
> 
> In either case, the remedy is for you to shut up and crawl back under the rock that you came from....LOL
> 
> You feel you are enlightened...good for you. I feel you have sacrificed your principles for an advantaged method. In other words, you are a sell out. We will never see eye to eye, at least on this subject.


I was made what? LOL !!! 
Go look at the very first post on this thread. Crossbow comes up, it's a part of the topic. I'm on topic here. Now tell me who's stupid?

Yes I'm advantaged. I can think and come to a logical conclusion and see what reality is. I hunt a lot in a ground blind. Tell me how drawing the bow or not drawing the bow behind a camo shoot through mesh makes any difference on a shot? So since blind hunting negates your claimed advantage of not having to draw the bow shouldn't blinds be made illegal in the places xbows are not allowed? Same result - different way to make it happen. It's recreation - no one save a few radical know it alls care.

I see Team Leghumper is resorting to name calling and insults. An admission of defeat. If they can't beat the post they try to beat the poster.


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> IBO rules, let me check, nope the Marlow report didn’t mention IBO, nor did I. I do recall you backing down from a challenge. I guess you got sick?
> 
> 
> 
> And just what are your comments based on? The only comment I have seen is your constant insults directed at Source, oh and your brown nosing of Jim, hope you don’t have hemorrhoids Jim, if you do they must be getting swollen by now.



what cretinous nonsense. I never backed down from a legitimate challenge-I told you that your pathetic leg humpin wasn't worth me wasting a day of my time and a 100 bucks in gas to prove something that no one with a brain disputes


----------



## thesource

BigBirdVA said:


> I see Team Leghumper is resorting to name calling and insults. An admission of defeat. If they can't beat the post they try to beat the poster.



I suppose I have to agree with you on this.....



Jim C said:


> YOu have no reason for being on AT other than to inflict your mental issues





JavaMan said:


> While he imagines himself a "chemical engineer" he really lives at home with his Mommy and Daddy or he is an out patient from a phychiatric ward.





Jim C said:


> your rantings have long ago become a pathetic joke source and your obsession is obviously spinning out of control.





aceoky said:


> Poor Free Range, with every single post he looks yet more foolish (IF that's even possible).......





doctariAFC said:


> I love the delusional. Truly love it.



Yup, Team Leghumper is a pretty fair description, and its clear that they have resorted to name calling and insults. I agree - An admission of defeat. Oh yea, wait, one more.



BigBirdVA said:


> Now tell me who's stupid?



LOL - I'm sure they welcome you to the team.


----------



## thesource

Free Range said:


> I do recall you backing down from a challenge. I guess you got sick?



Yup - that's exactly what happened. Major league Back down so he wouldn't have to take a smackdown.


----------



## Marvin

JavaMan said:


> Mr Source is such a nice guy.
> 
> the only person who is thought of as a _*jackass*_ is the person who wrote the above diatribe.
> 
> JavaMan


don't forget this one source!!


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> Originally Posted by BigBirdVA
> Now tell me who's stupid?
> 
> 
> LOL - I'm sure they welcome you to the team.


Do you have a loss of basic understanding of the English language? I asked you to tell me who's stupid. I didn't say you were. Another classic example of how you fail to completely understand what's happening in a post.


----------



## thesource

BigBirdVA said:


> Do you have a loss of basic understanding of the English language? I asked you to tell me who's stupid. I didn't say you were. Another classic example of how you fail to completely understand what's happening in a post.



LOL

Another classic example how you will avoid the point of a post to try and focus attention on the minutia.

PSSSSSST .... the point was that it is hypocritical for you to claim the other side is name calling and insulting when your side has been equally obnoxious throughout.

It amuses me how you crossbow guys enjoy playing the victim. Perhaps y'all should toughen up a bit.


----------



## JavaMan

BigBirdVA said:


> Do you have a loss of basic understanding of the English language? I asked you to tell me who's stupid. I didn't say you were. Another classic example of how you fail to completely understand what's happening in a post.


it's already been observed that Mr Source is unable to understand fully what is said by others.

Marvin or Peter Pan as he calls himself appears to be just as bad. My comment was correcting Mr Source from falsely accusing DoctariAFC of being a "jackass" and adjusting that comment to the correct party.

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

JavaMan said:


> it's already been observed that Mr Source is unable to understand fully what is said by others.


Oh........Hi Doug.

We were talking about people who insult and name call. Glad you showed up, since you are the worst offender by far (well, your idol JimC is close.)

I totally understand what is said by others. I just don't agree with some of it, and as a responsible American Bowhunter, I feel a need to set the record straight and highlight these misrepresentations and untruths from the radical crossbow extremists such as yourself.

Of course since you are a Canadian crossbower, you are neither American nor a bowhunter, and your 7 banishments from AT prove that you are far from responsible.

Have a nice day.......:darkbeer:


----------



## awshucks

Lemme see here if I got this right. The leghumping, brown-nosing, Canadian crossbow hunting sock puppet attacked a for real genuine American Bowhunter? Will all of this end up at an Alamo some where? :darkbeer:


----------



## doctariAFC

awshucks said:


> Lemme see here if I got this right. The leghumping, brown-nosing, Canadian crossbow hunting sock puppet attacked a for real genuine American Bowhunter? Will all of this end up at an Alamo some where? :darkbeer:


He didn't attack me at all 

Nice one Seth! That was a strangely accurate!


----------



## doctariAFC

The Anti-Crossbow Rally led by thesource...

However, looking for the right statements to make to voice their opposition to crossbows, they inadvertently hired JimC to create their signs.... Of course, since they took everything out of context, the end result was....







Priceless.....


----------



## thesource

awshucks said:


> Lemme see here if I got this right. The leghumping, brown-nosing, Canadian crossbow hunting sock puppet attacked a for real genuine American Bowhunter? Will all of this end up at an Alamo some where? :darkbeer:



LOL.

Cute......:darkbeer:


----------



## thesource

awshucks said:


> Lemme see here if I got this right. The leghumping, brown-nosing, Canadian crossbow hunting sock puppet attacked a for real genuine American Bowhunter? Will all of this end up at an Alamo some where? :darkbeer:





doctariAFC said:


> He didn't attack me at all


Obviously becaue you are either un-american, not a real bowhunter, or both.

Which is your downfall, Doc? (I'm betting its #2)


----------



## thesource

doctariAFC said:


> The Anti-Crossbow Rally led by thesource...
> However, looking for the right statements to make to voice their opposition to crossbows, they inadvertently hired JimC to create their signs.... Of course, since they took everything out of context, the end result was....


You should stick to unapologetic, fire-breathing, anarchist, ultra-righty politics.

You're comedic genius ..... isn't.

No wonder they booted you as a moderator ...lol


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Yup - that's exactly what happened. Major league Back down so he wouldn't have to take a smackdown.


wow, Free Range has a mini-me. I challenged both of you whiners to hold a crossbow steady longer than I can a compound from an offhand position. Never took me up on that.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> wow, Free Range has a mini-me. I challenged both of you whiners to hold a crossbow steady longer than I can a compound from an offhand position. Never took me up on that.


I'll accept that challenge if you use MY hunting compound. I'll use your hunting crossbow.

What do you say?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> I'll accept that challenge if you use MY hunting compound. I'll use your hunting crossbow.
> 
> What do you say?



what's your draw length and weight source?


----------



## BigBirdVA

Take video so I'll have something to laugh at!


----------



## Marvin

BigBirdVA said:


> Take video so I'll have something to laugh at!


I will if they won't thats for sure. Time for a smack down steel cage wrastling match.


----------



## doctariAFC

thesource said:


> You should stick to unapologetic, fire-breathing, anarchist, ultra-righty politics.
> 
> You're comedic genius ..... isn't.
> 
> No wonder they booted you as a moderator ...lol


Oh, come on, it was funny!


----------



## Marvin

doctariAFC said:


> Oh, come on, it was funny!


I must admit that one made my day even though I am off to tht right of the second sign


----------



## BigBirdVA

Marvin said:


> I will if they won't thats for sure. Time for a smack down steel cage wrastling match.


I'll go for that.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> what's your draw length and weight source?


My MIrage is 31" and 74#. Oh yea....Mirages have 45% letoff, BTW.

A hell of a lot more than the STUPID legal compound in Ohio bullcrap you spew, meaning a sissy 35# compound with 80% LO.

Cowboy up, Jim. We could use one of my hunting recurves, if you'd rather (I know you are fond of them) and see if you can hold that steadier too.

BTW..... I see nothing stipulating I can not build a bridge of bone from the kneeling position to assist me. They taught me that in the military .... with a rifle (ironic, that, yes?)


----------



## Marvin

BigBirdVA said:


> I'll go for that.


I wanted a barb wire cage match but that just plain looks like it hurts too much. Plus there is always some outside interference so its all good


----------



## Marvin

thesource said:


> My MIrage is 31" and 74#. Oh yea....Mirages have 45% letoff, BTW.
> 
> A hell of a lot more than the STUPID legal compound in Ohio bullcrap you spew, meaning a sissy 35# compound with 80% LO.
> 
> Cowboy up, Jim. We could use one of my hunting recurves, if you'd rather (I know you are fond of them) and see if you can hold that steadier too.
> 
> BTW..... I see nothing stipulating I can not build a bridge of bone from the kneeling position to assist me. They taught me that in the military .... with a rifle (ironic, that, yes?)


NO DRAW LOCKS EITHER !!!


----------



## Free Range

> However, looking for the right statements to make to voice their opposition to crossbows, they inadvertently hired JimC to create their signs.... Of course, since they took everything out of context, the end result was....


Now that there is funny, is that Doc standing up on the right trying to figure out why everyone but him is going the wrong way. And Jim on the left with is back to the camera as usual headed in the opposite direction of everyone else. 



> wow, Free Range has a mini-me. I challenged both of you whiners to hold a crossbow steady longer than I can a compound from an offhand position. Never took me up on that.


Ok, ready set go, you win, what does this have to do with anything? Now how about you try it with my hunting bow? Oh almost forgot, 58lbs, at 31”


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> My MIrage is 31" and 74#. Oh yea....Mirages have 45% letoff, BTW.
> 
> A hell of a lot more than the STUPID legal compound in Ohio bullcrap you spew, meaning a sissy 35# compound with 80% LO.
> 
> Cowboy up, Jim. We could use one of my hunting recurves, if you'd rather (I know you are fond of them) and see if you can hold that steadier too.
> 
> BTW..... I see nothing stipulating I can not build a bridge of bone from the kneeling position to assist me. They taught me that in the military .... with a rifle (ironic, that, yes?)



too long spammer. kneeling-but that isn't how anyone I know shoots deer with a crossbow. Forty pounds is the legal limit in ohio. I see you are confusing draw weight with manliness. Its obvious you are compensating for lacking something source. I wonder what it is. Smart deer hunters are dropping weight. I used to hunt with 66 pounds on a compound 58 in a recurve or long bow. I'm down to 57 now on my compound and 45 with my Gamemaster. Both shoot clean t hrough a 200 pound deer.

its moronic to shoot that much weight for deer


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> too long spammer. kneeling-but that isn't how anyone I know shoots deer with a crossbow. Forty pounds is the legal limit in ohio. I see you are confusing draw weight with manliness. Its obvious you are compensating for lacking something source. I wonder what it is. Smart deer hunters are dropping weight. I used to hunt with 66 pounds on a compound 58 in a recurve or long bow. I'm down to 57 now on my compound and 45 with my Gamemaster. Both shoot clean t hrough a 200 pound deer.
> 
> its moronic to shoot that much weight for deer



LOL.

Yet again, your mouth runs away before you can stop it.

I haven't hunted deer with a compound in 5 years. I have been hunting with a 52# recurve since. (Guess what? You just called me a smart deer hunter...lol )

I'm going to hunt with a 62# recurve this year. Because its pretty, and because I can.


Kneeling - you bet. Great shooting position, quick and steady, recommended in my military training. What's funny is you can take the exact same position with a gun and a crossbow....but not a real bow. Very telling, that.

I assume you are calling off our challenge? What a surprise.

Maybe Free Range can get a peice of this action...


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> Yet again, your mouth runs away before you can stop it.
> 
> I haven't hunted deer with a compound in 5 years. I have been hunting with a 52# recurve since. (Guess what? You just called me a smart deer hunter...lol )
> 
> I'm going to hunt with a 62# recurve this year. Because its pretty, and because I can.
> 
> 
> Kneeling - you bet. Great shooting position, quick and steady, recommended in my military training. What's funny is you can take the exact same position with a gun and a crossbow....but not a real bow. Very telling, that.
> 
> I assume you are calling off our challenge? What a surprise.
> 
> Maybe Free Range can get a peice of this action...



You read almost as poorly as you think-I said from an offhand position. standard 3D legal shooting position for both bows. You can lean against a tree with a compound source. You can steady your bow arm on a tree trunk source. where I hunt a kneeling position has very little use. same with the even more acurate prone position. In fact Kerry is the only guy I have met who claims to shoot deer in the woods after crawling on his belly from a prone position


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> You read almost as poorly as you think-I said from an offhand position. standard 3D legal shooting position for both bows.


First lets state the obvious. You HAVE to shoot a bow offhand - its part of what makes it a bow. Your lean against a tree bullcrap and wil-LIES steady ready garbage do not change the fact that real bows are shot offhand.

You ignore the fact that one of the crossbows multiple advantages over bows is that it CAN be rested. I know, I know...you will reply with your standard lie that you don't know anyone who shoots froma rest, blah, blah, blah.

Fine. Offhand it is. You have your stipulation. Now here is mine. We will not only keep track of who becomes unsteady first, but we will also shoot for score when the final guy becomes unsteady.

It will be fun - are we doing this? Your vixen and my mirage, right? Can we let Free Range in this, too?

Maybe BigMouthVA wants some of the action, too, instead of just poking people from the sidelines.


----------



## Free Range

> its moronic to shoot that much weight for deer



You really need to keep to targets, every time you talk about hunting, it just shines a bright light on your lack of credibility.


----------



## Free Range

Yeah this will be fun, and to help out old poor JimC the lawyer that can’t/won’t spend 100 bucks, we can tape it and send the tapes to Marvin to be voted on. 

Jim I don’t trust you enough to send you my hunting bow, so you will have to borrow one like it from one of your thousands of adoring fans, surly one of them has a 58lb longbow. And I will go down to BassPro, and tell them to fix me up with the most commonly sold hunting xb, I will hold it steady for as long as I can, when I can no longer hold it upright I will let down count to 2 lift it and shoot for score we can do this five times and add up the points. Each shooting at a, what are they called 5 point target? You do the same with my bow, hold until you can’t hold any longer let down count to 2 then rise up and shoot. The score will be based on target score and length of time held before each shot. How does that sound. I’m sure you won’t like it, so tell us how you think the shoot of should go.


----------



## thesource

Crossbows are illegal in NY, so I don't think I can do the old Bass Pro trick.

Besides, I want to use Jim's crossbow while he shoots my mirage. Looks like a road trip to Ohio.....

Think Jim will put me up for the night, seeing as we are both AT members and all?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> First lets state the obvious. You HAVE to shoot a bow offhand - its part of what makes it a bow. Your lean against a tree bullcrap and wil-LIES steady ready garbage do not change the fact that real bows are shot offhand.
> 
> You ignore the fact that one of the crossbows multiple advantages over bows is that it CAN be rested. I know, I know...you will reply with your standard lie that you don't know anyone who shoots froma rest, blah, blah, blah.
> 
> Fine. Offhand it is. You have your stipulation. Now here is mine. We will not only keep track of who becomes unsteady first, but we will also shoot for score when the final guy becomes unsteady.
> 
> It will be fun - are we doing this? Your vixen and my mirage, right? Can we let Free Range in this, too?
> 
> Maybe BigMouthVA wants some of the action, too, instead of just poking people from the sidelines.


You are lying-I have shot a bow sitting down and kneeling in some field courses where the footing was treacherous. Shot a deer leaning up against a tree with a martin cougar

your mirage draw length is too long


----------



## Jim C

Free Range said:


> Yeah this will be fun, and to help out old poor JimC the lawyer that can’t/won’t spend 100 bucks, we can tape it and send the tapes to Marvin to be voted on.
> 
> Jim I don’t trust you enough to send you my hunting bow, so you will have to borrow one like it from one of your thousands of adoring fans, surly one of them has a 58lb longbow. And I will go down to BassPro, and tell them to fix me up with the most commonly sold hunting xb, I will hold it steady for as long as I can, when I can no longer hold it upright I will let down count to 2 lift it and shoot for score we can do this five times and add up the points. Each shooting at a, what are they called 5 point target? You do the same with my bow, hold until you can’t hold any longer let down count to 2 then rise up and shoot. The score will be based on target score and length of time held before each shot. How does that sound. I’m sure you won’t like it, so tell us how you think the shoot of should go.


I own more bows than you can imagine. I currently have a 50-60 Hoyt Tec hunting bow, a Scepter II 50-60 3D bow, a 50-60 Hoyt Ultra Elite (set up for FITA), a 50-60 Protech I use for spots, a 50-60 ProStar set up for finger spots. here is what you do free range and you can test it yourself. get your compound bow and put one of those cheap laser pistol sights on your stabilizer. take aim at a target at 20 yards and have a friend (I assume you have one) take an nfaa target down range and put it so its centered on the laser point. put a VCR cameral on that spot and time it.

take a hunting crossbow and tape the laser to the scope-do the same thing

then compare the tapes

I have already done this test in my old shop-we used a excalibur exocet (original version) and the various archers own compound bows. the compound won every time

want to prove me wrong-do the test yourself


----------



## JavaMan

who shoots a compound with a 31" draw? Most likely Mr Source was overdrawing. JimC correctly observed the trad ranks are filled with those who couldn't cut it with a compound.

Mr Source, again you are confused and unless you actually can PROVE IT I suggest you stop making these wild accusations.

you sure I am not an American?

JavaMan


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> You are lying-I have shot a bow sitting down and kneeling in some field courses where the footing was treacherous. Shot a deer leaning up against a tree with a martin cougar
> 
> your mirage draw length is too long


LOL. Does sitting down mean from the sitting position? (elbows on knees - bridge of bone - you can do that with a gun and a crossbow. )

Does kneeling mean from the kneeling position? (elbow on knee - bridge of bone - you can do that with a gun and a crossbow.)

No...what you mean is that you were shooting offhand (unrested) while sitting and kneeling.

A total joke.


How about my hunting recurves for our contest? That's actually what I use, and there will not be a draw length issue there, right?


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I own more bows than you can imagine. I currently have a 50-60 Hoyt Tec hunting bow, a Scepter II 50-60 3D bow, a 50-60 Hoyt Ultra Elite (set up for FITA), a 50-60 Protech I use for spots, a 50-60 ProStar set up for finger spots. here is what you do free range and you can test it yourself. get your compound bow and put one of those cheap laser pistol sights on your stabilizer. take aim at a target at 20 yards and have a friend (I assume you have one) take an nfaa target down range and put it so its centered on the laser point. put a VCR cameral on that spot and time it.
> 
> take a hunting crossbow and tape the laser to the scope-do the same thing
> 
> then compare the tapes
> 
> I have already done this test in my old shop-we used a excalibur exocet (original version) and the various archers own compound bows. the compound won every time
> 
> want to prove me wrong-do the test yourself



Free Range - don't forget to score the shots after the sighting becomes unsteady.

That is actually the ONLY reason this should matter, after all.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL. Does sitting down mean from the sitting position? (elbows on knees - bridge of bone - you can do that with a gun and a crossbow. )
> 
> Does kneeling mean from the kneeling position? (elbow on knee - bridge of bone - you can do that with a gun and a crossbow.)
> 
> No...what you mean is that you were shooting offhand (unrested) while sitting and kneeling.
> 
> A total joke.
> 
> 
> How about my hunting recurves for our contest? That's actually what I use, and there will not be a draw length issue there, right?


crossbow is easier to hold steady than a recurve. that isn't an issue-since compounds are the standard hunting bow in the USA-you claim xbows are cheating, I am showing you that once compounds were allowed, your psycological problems with crossbows are not only the sign of mental illness, they are based on disinformation


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> Maybe BigMouthVA wants some of the action, too, instead of just poking people from the sidelines.


Anytime you need a fix of action come on down. I've got your's right here.


----------



## BigBirdVA

Jim C said:


> crossbow is easier to hold steady than a recurve. that isn't an issue-since compounds are the standard hunting bow in the USA-you claim xbows are cheating, I am showing you that once compounds were allowed, your psycological problems with crossbows are not only the sign of mental illness, they are based on disinformation


Still you have to give him an "E" for effort. Did you expect him to use an average middle of the road compound bow vs an xbow? And he calls xbows cheating! LOL Now that's funny.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> crossbow is easier to hold steady than a recurve. that isn't an issue-since compounds are the standard hunting bow in the USA-you claim xbows are cheating, I am showing you that once compounds were allowed, your psycological problems with crossbows are not only the sign of mental illness, they are based on disinformation


The only thing you've shown is that you can back down from shooting and, now, holding challenges.


Your whole point is ludicrous in any event. Any one who has an issue holding a crossbow steady for any period of time can always do what the others with a similar shooting weapon do...put it on a gun rest. That can be a padded rail, resting your elbows on your knees, whatever.

BOWhunters, however, will do what bowhunters have always done. Time it right and hold it, or let down and pass.

All you have done is further illustrate the advantages of guns and crossbows over real bows. Thanks for your help....:darkbeer:


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> The only thing you've shown is that you can back down from shooting and, now, holding challenges.
> 
> 
> Your whole point is ludicrous in any event. Any one who has an issue holding a crossbow steady for any period of time can always do what the others with a similar shooting weapon do...put it on a gun rest. That can be a padded rail, resting your elbows on your knees, whatever.
> 
> BOWhunters, however, will do what bowhunters have always done. Time it right and hold it, or let down and pass.
> 
> All you have done is further illustrate the advantages of guns and crossbows over real bows. Thanks for your help....:darkbeer:


NO what is moronic is a person totally ignorant of crossbow hunting continuing to lie by posting BS that xbows have some advantage over compound bows based on your ignorant ASSumptions. The fact is you cannot prove that a crossbow has ANY NET advantage over a compound bow when it comes to killing deer and thus your bedwetting over xbows being "unfair" is based on your ignorance and your lies

that is the entire point source-mental issues substituting for facts and logic


----------



## thesource

BigBirdVA said:


> Anytime you need a fix of action come on down. I've got your's right here.



Clarification, please. Tell me what you are actually implying, here.......lol

I'll need a street address and a date and time.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> NO what is moronic is a person totally ignorant of crossbow hunting continuing to lie by posting BS that xbows have some advantage over compound bows based on your ignorant ASSumptions. The fact is you cannot prove that a crossbow has ANY NET advantage over a compound bow when it comes to killing deer and thus your bedwetting over xbows being "unfair" is based on your ignorance and your lies
> 
> that is the entire point source-mental issues substituting for facts and logic



YAwwwwwn.

No, Jim. There are advantages to crossbows over real bows that are indisputable to any rational person. (I don't expect that you will admit to them, but then I am repeating myself...)

There is no dispute that the skills required to shoot a crossbow are the same as those required to shoot a gun, and neither of those require anything like the skill set required to shoot a bow.

Those facts and that logic are on MY side, and all your bellyaching and barking won't change the fact that crossbows, quite simply, do not belong with bows.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> YAwwwwwn.
> 
> No, Jim. There are advantages to crossbows over real bows that are indisputable to any rational person. (I don't expect that you will admit to them, but then I am repeating myself...)
> 
> There is no dispute that the skills required to shoot a crossbow are the same as those required to shoot a gun, and neither of those require anything like the skill set required to shoot a bow.
> 
> Those facts and that logic are on MY side, and all your bellyaching and barking won't change the fact that crossbows, quite simply, do not belong with bows.



well gee source-you confuse advantages with NET advantages and ease of use with effectiveness.

now lets address your mental issues as to why you are so hung up on what other people use in archery season and someone with as little knowledge of archery as you do telling me what sort of bows belong in archery season


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> well gee source-you confuse advantages with NET advantages and ease of use with effectiveness.
> 
> now lets address your mental issues as to why you are so hung up on what other people use in archery season and someone with as little knowledge of archery as you do telling me what sort of bows belong in archery season


Why don't you explain to me why someone with as little knowledge of bowhunting as you apparently do has the nerve to tell ME what equipment belongs in bowseason?

Shut up and take notes - bows only.


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> Clarification, please. Tell me what you are actually implying, here.......lol
> 
> I'll need a street address and a date and time.


I'll be at the hunting show in Richmond Aug 12. Hows that?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Why don't you explain to me why someone with as little knowledge of bowhunting as you apparently do has the nerve to tell ME what equipment belongs in bowseason?
> 
> Shut up and take notes - bows only.


source-not one person here vouches for your "Expertise" Crossbows belong in bow season because they are bows. I tell you because you are far less intelligent than I am and you have mental issues that interfere with your ability to understand reality. You have already admitted that legalization of crossbows will have no negative affect upon any thing that matters to the public

You have made specious claims that using a crossbow is cheating

YET you have never had the courage to tell us who or what is cheated

care to answer that?

the fact is that the wishes of many to use crossbows outweighs the mental disease of the selfish and the egocentric

YOU SUFFER no harm or inconvenience but many who want to use crossbows are affected by your mental illness preventing them from exercising a choice that you have already admitted causes no harm


----------



## thesource

BigBirdVA said:


> I'll be at the hunting show in Richmond Aug 11. Hows that?


Will you be wearing a skirt while you are shooting your crossbow?


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Will you be wearing a skirt while you are shooting your crossbow?



the sources decompensation spirals out of control. poor source thinks his bow is a substitute for viagra.


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I tell you because you are far less intelligent than I am


LOL.

After watching you struggle with my physics lessons here, I am not at ALL sure that you are right about that.:tongue:


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> Will you be wearing a skirt while you are shooting your crossbow?


Tell you what I'll bring a skirt and we'll determine there who ends up wearing it. Hows that?


----------



## BigBirdVA

Jim C said:


> the sources decompensation spirals out of control. poor source thinks his bow is a substitute for viagra.


Viagra only makes existing things work - not appear out of thin air.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> After watching you struggle with my physics lessons here, I am not at ALL sure that you are right about that.:tongue:


your constant stupidity about crossbows proves my point. You still haven't answered the question concerning your claim as to cheating. Your comment about the skirt proves you have serious mental problems source. are you transgendered too?


----------



## thesource

BigBirdVA said:


> Tell you what I'll bring a skirt and we'll determine there who ends up wearing it. Hows that?



Whoa there, bigboy. This ain't brokeback mountain. What goes on in crossbowland stays in crossbowland....I want no part of that.


:bolt:


----------



## Jim C

BigBirdVA said:


> Viagra only makes existing things work - not appear out of thin air.



Point taken-:wink:


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> your constant stupidity about crossbows proves my point. You still haven't answered the question concerning your claim as to cheating. Your comment about the skirt proves you have serious mental problems source. are you transgendered too?



Not at all, but you should ask your friends that. I've always considered the crossbow perfect for women, or those too effeminate to use a real bow.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> Not at all, but you should ask your friends that. I've always considered the crossbow perfect for women, or those too effeminate to use a real bow.



your sexual issues apparently are just one part of your other mental problems. We have always said that your perceptions of masculinity and macho-ego are tied to your perceived status as a bowhunter and you find people using crossbows an attack on your self confidence as a man. That is proven further by this moronic post of yours


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> your sexual issues apparently are just one part of your other mental problems. We have always said that your perceptions of masculinity and macho-ego are tied to your perceived status as a bowhunter and you find people using crossbows an attack on your self confidence as a man. That is proven further by this moronic post of yours


LOL.

Now you pretend to be a psychologist. Oh well, you also pretend to be a bowhunter....

Don't worry Jim. As long as you feel good about yourself shooting a crossbow it shouldn't matter what the rest of us think.

You DO seem to be a bit sensitive about the subject. I guess you are just more in tune with your feminine side ......


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL.
> 
> Now you pretend to be a psychologist. Oh well, you also pretend to be a bowhunter....
> 
> Don't worry Jim. As long as you feel good about yourself shooting a crossbow it shouldn't matter what the rest of us think.
> 
> You DO seem to be a bit sensitive about the subject. I guess you are just more in tune with your feminine side ......



I think its obvious to the board who has serious mental issues. Bowhunting is a recreational activity to me Source. I don't read sexuality into what sort of bow people hunt with. Your obviously obsess over the subject and its clear that your fixation on this recreational activity has turned into a sexual outlet for you. Thanks for proving again what we all know about you source


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> I think its obvious to the board who has serious mental issues. Bowhunting is a recreational activity to me Source. I don't read sexuality into what sort of bow people hunt with. Your obviously obsess over the subject and its clear that your fixation on this recreational activity has turned into a sexual outlet for you. Thanks for proving again what we all know about you source



LOL

Its not " a sexual olutlet" and its not "a recreationaly activity", its hunting.

Specifically, its bowhunting.

It is significantly more important to many of us than simply a "recreational activity", and that is why we defend and protect it. 

Personally, I do not care that you use a crossbow in OH regardless of season. That is Ohio sportsmen's business. As you say, it doesn't hurt me. But I do care that you contaminate bowhunting by calling it simply "recreation", and by calling yourself a bowhunter when you are not.

If you do not wish to acknowledge bowhunting for ALL that it is, fine. But you should not strive to deprive the rest of us from seeking that.

The way I see it, real bowhunters tolerate you "recreationalists", and not the other way around.


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> LOL
> 
> Its not " a sexual olutlet" and its not "a recreationaly activity", its hunting.
> 
> Specifically, its bowhunting.
> 
> It is significantly more important to many of us than simply a "recreational activity", and that is why we defend and protect it.
> 
> Personally, I do not care that you use a crossbow in OH regardless of season. That is Ohio sportsmen's business. As you say, it doesn't hurt me. But I do care that you contaminate bowhunting by calling it simply "recreation", and by calling yourself a bowhunter when you are not.
> 
> If you do not wish to acknowledge bowhunting for ALL that it is, fine. But you should not strive to deprive the rest of us from seeking that.
> 
> The way I see it, real bowhunters tolerate you "recreationalists", and not the other way around.



your obsession is duly noted but ask the IRS what bowhunting is and it is labeled as a hobby or recreational activity. that you think you are better than others due to you taking it more seriously (or in all fairness-obsessing over it to the point of putting others down) merely shows you have mental issues.

since most bowhunters aren't obsessive its we who tolerate you fanatics not the other way around source-the vast majority of bowhunters don't suffer from your illness or fanatacism.

I am still waiting for you to explain your Cheating reference

You have ignored that several times-are you too girly to answer it:wink:


----------



## thesource

Jim C said:


> your obsession is duly noted but ask the IRS what bowhunting is and it is labeled as a hobby or recreational activity. that you think you are better than others due to you taking it more seriously (or in all fairness-obsessing over it to the point of putting others down) merely shows you have mental issues.
> 
> since most bowhunters aren't obsessive its we who tolerate you fanatics not the other way around source-the vast majority of bowhunters don't suffer from your illness or fanatacism.
> 
> I am still waiting for you to explain your Cheating reference
> 
> You have ignored that several times-are you too girly to answer it:wink:


So we should look to the IRS to define bowhunting for us? - absolutely IDIOTIC. jeeesh.

First - you are not a bowhunter, you are a crossbow hunter. You are lucky that OH bowhunters tolerate you in their midst WHATSOEVER, let alone during their bowseason..

Second - Do not presume that you, a crossbower, can lecture me, a bowhunter, about what bowhunting is and is not. Pope and Young can presume to speak for bowhunters, those who cannot summon the strength to draw a real bow should not believe they can summon the strength to speak for me.

Finally - I have answered the "cheating reference" repeatedly, but I will do so again just to shut you up. P&Y defines fair chase for bowhunters. They list those things that are not in compliance, and they define the principle of fair chase as "the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit of free-ranging wild game animals in a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal."

I believe that a crossbow provides "improper" and "unfair" advantage over the animal during bowseason. Period. It is therefore unethical. I consider it cheating.

There you have it, in black and white.


----------



## JavaMan

I think JimC makes an interesting point that Mr Source correlates drawing a bow as he defines it to his sexuality.

thank you JimC for that point.

I also note that Mr Source seems unable to think past his pretended church-the Pope and Young Club-which matters not to most bowhunters. Perhaps he sees P&Y as the woman he never could have, or some authority figure he looks up too-and them down to him as approval for all the failure he's achieved personal and professional.

Also noted is a crossBOW is a BOW-so with that anyone hunting with one is infact a BOWHUNTER. Interesting, I was at a bookstore today, and found the 2006 copy of Archer's Digest. On the back cover there is a crossbow, and a complete section on them as well. JimC has also hunted with conventional bows.

apparently Mr Source thinks that his ramblings carry any weight-but he fails to provide his name so reference can be given. I suspect this is also tied to his mental illness, and feelings of inadequacy in regards to his sexuality and personal and professional life. 

JavaMan


----------



## Jim C

thesource said:


> So we should look to the IRS to define bowhunting for us? - absolutely IDIOTIC. jeeesh.


No source -not to define bowhunting but to classify it-for you its a recreational activity-a hobby. its not a profession, its not a charity so its a hobby.



thesource said:


> First - you are not a bowhunter, you are a crossbow hunter. You are lucky that OH bowhunters tolerate you in their midst WHATSOEVER, let alone during their bowseason..


I hunt with all bows source-I won't let intellectual inferiors define what I am. As to tolerate-there are more crossbow hunters than compound hunters in Ohio source. Given your rants about "gun hunters" I wonder why NY gunhunters tolerate your pathetic arrogance



thesource said:


> Second - Do not presume that you, a crossbower, can lecture me, a bowhunter, about what bowhunting is and is not. Pope and Young can presume to speak for bowhunters, those who cannot summon the strength to draw a real bow should not believe they can summon the strength to speak for me.


I lecture you because you are ignorant and act stupid. You post errors and lies about crossbows. I hunt with all bows and thus I know more about bowhunting than you do. I am also a recognized archery coach and thus I correct some of you unlearned comments about making the archery shot.
You should be thankful that a master coach spends time correcting your errors. 



thesource said:


> Finally - I have answered the "cheating reference" repeatedly, but I will do so again just to shut you up. P&Y defines fair chase for bowhunters. They list those things that are not in compliance, and they define the principle of fair chase as "the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit of free-ranging wild game animals in a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal."
> 
> I believe that a crossbow provides "improper" and "unfair" advantage over the animal during bowseason. Period. It is therefore unethical. I consider it cheating.
> 
> There you have it, in black and white.


In other words you twist even their definition of fair chase since clearly a gun is not a violation of fair chaise either. You also contradict your position of saying xbows should be in their own season. You have thus been proven an hypocrite a liar and a buffoon because a method is fair or unfair based on its characteristics, not what you call the seaons.

do you consider a gun to violate your warped and perverted definition of "fair chase"


----------



## BigBirdVA

thesource said:


> Finally - I have answered the "cheating reference" repeatedly, but I will do so again just to shut you up. P&Y defines fair chase for bowhunters. They list those things that are not in compliance, and they define the principle of fair chase as "the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit of free-ranging wild game animals in a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal."


P&Y is just another hunting cult. However I do know their biggest Kool-Aid drinker.:darkbeer:


----------



## Seth the XSlayr

You guys should stop attacking each other, it really degrades your character.


All of yaz


And yes, I make fun of handicapped children so who am I to speak?


I'm Newt Gingrich ladies and I'm the house speaker up in this beeeeyatch...




I have an idea that could possibly lead to at least a few agreements from both sides and would halt all the personal attacks.


Don't get me wrong, I love ripping someone apart and bashing them in hopes that when they finish reading my post, they weep relentlessly....





HOWEVER, after 45 mind boggling pages of bickering back and forth, we should have an interesting exchange of beliefs between myself, Jim & thesource...


I have the format figured out, who's interested?


----------



## twogun

> No Debating The Merit Of Cross Bows
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Please do not debate the validity and merit of crossbows in any regard. YEP -- new AT rule from the top (above me).
> 
> You guys just end up flaming each other and NEVER come to any conclusion...been yapping like magpies for months on this stuff.
> 
> Thanks
> OX
> __________________


Has this rule been lifted?


----------



## Marvin

twogun said:


> Has this rule been lifted?


looks like the gangs all here!! WB twogun :star: 

if there's going to be skirt wearing then i wanna know a time and date to see this......BBVA seems like a size 18...maybe 20.....well have to sew two togehter to get right size. 

java doug....i have a 31" draw fyi


----------



## Marvin

Seth the XSlayr said:


> You guys should stop attacking each other, it really degrades your character.
> 
> 
> All of yaz
> 
> 
> And yes, I make fun of handicapped children so who am I to speak?
> 
> 
> I'm Newt Gingrich ladies and I'm the house speaker up in this beeeeyatch...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have an idea that could possibly lead to at least a few agreements from both sides and would halt all the personal attacks.
> 
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I love ripping someone apart and bashing them in hopes that when they finish reading my post, they weep relentlessly....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HOWEVER, after 45 mind boggling pages of bickering back and forth, we should have an interesting exchange of beliefs between myself, Jim & thesource...
> 
> 
> I have the format figured out, who's interested?


i am game.... speak seth. not contests though between opponents. ricks the only one that has steped up so far


----------



## fasst

Ok guys, I am back in town. And yea, the crossbow merit debate is getting very tired.
Almost every thread posted in here turns into a debate, unless I lock it at the first sign.....suppose that should happen from now on.


----------

