WY Taking a Look at Technlogy Concerning Hunting

[highplainsdrifter]

I agree 100%.
Nevada allows the use of crossbows during "any legal weapon" season. They are prohibited during archery or muzzle loader seasons.

I'd like to point out that a state that has always banned crossbows during archery season is different than Wyoming which is now considering a ban after many legal years. Many of us own expensive equipment that will become worthless if crossbows are banned. If I remember correctly, I paid $1,300 for mine. So a question for those of you who support a Wyoming ban: Are you willing to buy our soon to be worthless equipment? Are you willing to encourage G&F to buy our equipment?

Banning something after it has been allowed for years, is quite different than never allowing it from the beginning.

 

[kidoggy]

I'd like to point out that a state that has always banned crossbows during archery season is different than Wyoming which is now considering a ban after many legal years. Many of us own expensive equipment that will become worthless if crossbows are banned. If I remember correctly, I paid $1,300 for mine. So a question for those of you who support a Wyoming ban: Are you willing to buy our soon to be worthless equipment? Are you willing to encourage G&F to buy our equipment?

Banning something after it has been allowed for years, is quite different than never allowing it from the beginning.

depends what kind of deals are you offering?

to be clear ,I am NOT for banning.

 

[Colorado T]

I'd like to point out that a state that has always banned crossbows during archery season is different than Wyoming which is now considering a ban after many legal years. Many of us own expensive equipment that will become worthless if crossbows are banned. If I remember correctly, I paid $1,300 for mine. So a question for those of you who support a Wyoming ban: Are you willing to buy our soon to be worthless equipment? Are you willing to encourage G&F to buy our equipment?

Banning something after it has been allowed for years, is quite different than never allowing it from the beginning.

I don't understand why you would need to sell your equipment? The talk is not of a complete ban, only banning during archery season. You would still be able to use the equipment during the rifle seasons. I am another who believes Colorado and Pope & Young have it correct.

 

[highplainsdrifter]

I don't understand why you would need to sell your equipment? The talk is not of a complete ban, only banning during archery season. You would still be able to use the equipment during the rifle seasons. I am another who believes Colorado and Pope & Young have it correct.

I wouldn't want to use my crossbow during rifle season. I have pointed out why a couple of times above...camo would not be a good idea during rifle season, there are too many rifle hunters spooking the elk, etc.

I get the impression that some in favor of a ban think a crossbow is like a rifle. Some even have the audacity to call it a crossgun! It is not a gun! It shoots an arrow, not a bullet. Wind can easily blow your arrow (bolt) off course. Also, the smallest twig can deflect your arrow. While some manufactures apparently claim 3 inch accuracy at 100 yards, that does not mean you can/should try to shoot an elk at 100 yards. I feel that 60 yards is my limit with my crossbow. That is only about 10 yards further than I would have shot with my compound when I was using it.

There are a lot of MISCONCEPTIONS about crossbows on this thread. I started shooting a longbow when I was 13. I then went to a recurve and later a compound. Now I have been shooting a crossbow for about 5 years. All together, I have been shooting archery for 57 years. I know what I am talking about!

So I offer this challenge: The next one of you who offers an off the wall opinion about crossbows, please include some details about your personal experience with archery equipment in general and crossbows in particular...not heresay, not bias, but personal experience. And if someone starts ranting about crossguns, I encourage everyone to dismiss it as the biased rant it is.

 

[LaHunter]

Because good rifle elk tags take years to draw and otc elk tags are a circus shit show. Young boys and girls can't pull enough poundage to ethically kill an elk and are typically not proficient enough with a compound.

Road hunting and staying within a mile of the truck, stand hunting a crossbow may have the advantage, but stalking and going into the back country no way. Try carrying a crossbow for a extended period. You have a scope on top, a quiver full of arrows on the bottom, a limb that sticks out each side and if its cocked a string that goes down each side limiting the ways to carry it and its heavy plus you have to carry shooting sticks to stabilize a front heavy crossbow.
I bought a Ravin last year for my son to hunt WY elk last year and it was a pain in the a$$ to carry more than a half mile.

If crossbows are such a difficult / pain in the azz to use, then why are so many people justifying them for the young, elderly, and physically challenged? That argument doesn't 'hold water'.

 

[LaHunter]

Think it comes down to the definition of 'Archery'. I haven't read a single post that wants to ban crossbows totally, those opposed just want them banned during archery only seasons. How many archer competitions allow crossbows? Crossbows absolutely have an advantage over compound bows, can't argue that.

 

[Dakota Drifter]

If crossbows are such a difficult / pain in the azz to use, then why are so many people justifying them for the young, elderly, and physically challenged? That argument doesn't 'hold water'.

Well its pretty simple, carry a compound bow thru the woods that you can't draw or carry a heavy bulky crossbow that you can shoot. By the way I carried the crossbow to and from the stand for my son and that is why I know what it takes to hunt, carry, stalk with one.

The haters seem to ignore the fact that compound bows have an extreme advantage over stick bows yet I bet most of those haters shoot compounds.

 

[kidoggy]

Well its pretty simple, carry a compound bow thru the woods that you can't draw or carry a heavy bulky crossbow that you can shoot. By the way I carried the crossbow to and from the stand for my son and that is why I know what it takes to hunt, carry, stalk with one.

The haters seem to ignore the fact that compound bows have an extreme advantage over stick bows yet I bet most of those haters shoot compounds.

you're not suggesting that people are hypocrites are you? say it isn't so.

 

[CrimsonArrow]

So I offer this challenge: The next one of you who offers an off the wall opinion about crossbows, please include some details about your personal experience with archery equipment in general and crossbows in particular...not heresay, not bias, but personal experience. And if someone starts ranting about crossguns, I encourage everyone to dismiss it as the biased rant it is.

Here's my experience, and the reason I am against anyone without a disability using a crossbow during regular archery season. I've been bowhunting for 25 years, worked hard at it, and have been pretty successful with my compound. I have a recurve that i shoot well out to 20 yards, but don't feel confident enough to hunt with. That will take a couple more years of practice. When my stepmother retired, her coworkers bought her an inexpensive barnett crossbow. She and my dad sighted it in, and the first time I ever shot it, I shot three bolts. All in a 1" circle, breaking a nock, while shooting offhand at 30 yards. Zero learning curve. My fear is that newer hunters will not learn the appreciation of the rewards of hard work and practice. Just go out and kill an animal, post pics on social media, sit back and wait for the accolades.

 

[highplainsdrifter]

Think it comes down to the definition of 'Archery'. I haven't read a single post that wants to ban crossbows totally, those opposed just want them banned during archery only seasons. How many archer competitions allow crossbows? Crossbows absolutely have an advantage over compound bows, can't argue that.

My 57 years of experience with archery equipment has taught me that crossbows have the following advantages over compound/recurves/longbows: First and foremost, they allow you to shoot from a "cocked" position. This means you do not have to go through the "drawing action" when an elk is standing in front of you. I can't tell you how many elk encounters I have had ruined when drawing back with a compound. It was a lot! Second, because they have a cocking device (either a pulley assist or a crank), people with less strength can cock them. Third, they tend to be more accurate because you can generally hold them steadier than you can when struggling to hold back and aim a compound/recurve/longbow. Finally, because they sometimes come with scopes that makes them somewhat more accurate.

In my opinion, all of these are good things. They allow someone with less strength to get into archery hunting and they allow for cleaner more ethical kills (but there is always the human factor involved...get too excited, etc.)

Because they shoot an arrow (bolt) rather than a bullet, they MUCH more closely meet the definition of archery equipment than rifle equipment. All this talk of using them during rifle season is ridiculous! When rifle season comes around, I'm going to use my trusty ought six.

 

[Horsenhike]

My 57 years of experience with archery equipment has taught me that crossbows have the following advantages over compound/recurves/longbows: First and foremost, they allow you to shoot from a "cocked" position. This means you do not have to go through the "drawing action" when an elk is standing in front of you. I can't tell you how many elk encounters I have had ruined when drawing back with a compound. It was a lot! Second, because they have a cocking device (either a pulley assist or a crank), people with less strength can cock them. Third, they tend to be more accurate because you can generally hold them steadier than you can when struggling to hold back and aim a compound/recurve/longbow. Finally, because they sometimes come with scopes that makes them somewhat more accurate.

In my opinion, all of these are good things. They allow someone with less strength to get into archery hunting and they allow for cleaner more ethical kills (but there is always the human factor involved...get too excited, etc.)

Because they shoot an arrow (bolt) rather than a bullet, they MUCH more closely meet the definition of archery equipment than rifle equipment. All this talk of using them during rifle season is ridiculous! When rifle season comes around, I'm going to use my trusty ought six.

You need to include the fact that crossbows have a poundage rating 2-3X what the average person can draw with a bow. That poundage translates into energy, which translates into distance, which is the primary concern most people have with them. Beings that they are shot from a cocked position, utilize an optic, and have a fixed trigger, they more resemble a gun than a bow. I would bet a poll of average people would agree. A pole of x-bow shooters would obviously not.

No comparison.

 

[BuzzH]

Here's my experience, and the reason I am against anyone without a disability using a crossbow during regular archery season. I've been bowhunting for 25 years, worked hard at it, and have been pretty successful with my compound. I have a recurve that i shoot well out to 20 yards, but don't feel confident enough to hunt with. That will take a couple more years of practice. When my stepmother retired, her coworkers bought her an inexpensive barnett crossbow. She and my dad sighted it in, and the first time I ever shot it, I shot three bolts. All in a 1" circle, breaking a nock, while shooting offhand at 30 yards. Zero learning curve. My fear is that newer hunters will not learn the appreciation of the rewards of hard work and practice. Just go out and kill an animal, post pics on social media, sit back and wait for the accolades.

I wonder how the people felt that started the sport of archery? You know, the guys that shot self bows, long bows, and recurves? Their sport was cheapened by the "short cut", and lack of "hard work" of the modern compound bow for sure, no question...you admit it, right in your post.

Archery technology has blown so far past the original intent of the sport, its not even recognizable today. Technology has been closing the gap between the effective range of a compound and cross bow for decades. Splitting hairs at this point.

Oh, and for the record, regarding all the "hard work" and "dedication" it takes to kill something with a compound...that's funny stuff.

A friend (shoots a recurve and has been bow hunting since the 60's) drew a pronghorn tag some years back and since I had a couple doe tags in the unit he drew, figured I'd tag along and hunt with him just for something to do.

I broke out the Mathews from the rafters. Since I hadn't planned on archery hunting, I had not shot it for 9-10 months.

Found a clay bank, shot 3 arrows at 30, 40, and 50 yards...total of 9 arrows.

Next morning, had a single doe come into 48 yards (I didn't want to shoot a doe that had fawns)...no big deal.

The next morning had another single doe come into 22 yards...same same:

Modern compounds don't require any more dedication to the sport or "hard work" than a crossbow...recurves, self bows, and long bows...different story and that argument holds water.

 

[highplainsdrifter]

You need to include the fact that crossbows have a poundage rating 2-3X what the average person can draw with a bow. That poundage translates into energy, which translates into distance, which is the primary concern most people have with them. Beings that they are shot from a cocked position, utilize an optic, and have a fixed trigger, they more resemble a gun than a bow. I would bet a poll of average people would agree. A pole of x-bow shooters would obviously not.

No comparison.

The distance advantage is WAY over rated. Here is why.

Because you are shooting an arrow, not a bullet, all the limitations of an arrow come into play including:

1) The arrow can be heavily influenced by wind (much more so than a bullet).

2) The arrow can be easily deflected by the smallest twig (much more so than a bullet).

3) An arrow (broadhead) kills via bleeding. A bullet kills primarily via shock. Therefore shot placement is much more critical with a crossbow/recurve/longbow/compound. As a result, no one would should ever take a running shot with a crossbow. With a bullet, running shots are common place...although maybe not advisable.

4) Because a crossbow bolt travels much more slowly than a bullet, there is the possibility that the animal will move (or jump the string) before the bolt arrives at its target. This is much more likely than a bullet with graver consequences.

For all of these reasons, it would be foolish for anyone to shoot at an animal with crossbow at a much further distance than a compound bow.

In a previous post, I challenged naysayers to list their experience with crossbows before spouting off. If you had used both crossbows and compounds as much as I have, you would know that the distance claims for crossbows are way over rated. I would say, a shot at a large animal such as an elk should be limited to 60 or 70 yards in ideal conditions and less than that if there is brush in the way or wind. That is comparable to what a compound shooter would do.

 

[highplainsdrifter]

...they more resemble a gun than a bow. I would bet a poll of average people would agree. A pole of x-bow shooters would obviously not.

No comparison.

Perhaps a poll of "average people" would agree...I don't know about that. But I was under the impression that the people commenting on this thread are not average people. They are hunters and should have a lot more knowledge of hunting equipment than "average people".

I'll bet some of those complaining about crossbows have never even shot one.

 

[Gr8bawana]

Think it comes down to the definition of 'Archery'. I haven't read a single post that wants to ban crossbows totally, those opposed just want them banned during archery only seasons. How many archer competitions allow crossbows? Crossbows absolutely have an advantage over compound bows, can't argue that.

This is a good point. highplainsdrifter, do you think guys competing in an archery tournament would be ok with one of the competitors using a crossbow? Because as you say there is no advantage.

 

[CrimsonArrow]

I wonder how the people felt that started the sport of archery? You know, the guys that shot self bows, long bows, and recurves? Their sport was cheapened by the "short cut", and lack of "hard work" of the modern compound bow for sure, no question...you admit it, right in your post.

Archery technology has blown so far past the original intent of the sport, its not even recognizable today. Technology has been closing the gap between the effective range of a compound and cross bow for decades. Splitting hairs at this point.

Oh, and for the record, regarding all the "hard work" and "dedication" it takes to kill something with a compound...that's funny stuff.

A friend (shoots a recurve and has been bow hunting since the 60's) drew a pronghorn tag some years back and since I had a couple doe tags in the unit he drew, figured I'd tag along and hunt with him just for something to do.

I broke out the Mathews from the rafters. Since I hadn't planned on archery hunting, I had not shot it for 9-10 months.

Found a clay bank, shot 3 arrows at 30, 40, and 50 yards...total of 9 arrows.

Next morning, had a single doe come into 48 yards (I didn't want to shoot a doe that had fawns)...no big deal.

The next morning had another single doe come into 22 yards...same same:

Modern compounds don't require any more dedication to the sport or "hard work" than a crossbow...recurves, self bows, and long bows...different story and that argument holds water.

Yep, now hand that bow of yours to someone else who has never shot it and see how it goes

 

[dan maule]

Idk. I have no issues with crossbows as method of take.

(As as aside, in my experience they're way more finicky in the breeze that most realize. The bolts seem just to be more sensitive to wind. It takes some time and practice to reliably learn to make adjustments for wind. Just seen too many good ol' boys go out with some new super fast x-bow, with limited range time, and in a light breeze shot are missing or wounding. 'Perfect practice makes perfect')

Regards,

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337Z using Tapatalk

Could not agree more! I see all these comments about shooting 100 yards. With the wind I typically experience in Wyoming if someone is going to attempt a 100 yard shot they will have to play the wind by 5 to 10 feet or more.

 

[Horsenhike]

At this point I'm almost convinced that there needs to be a special early season for crossbows only. I had no idea that a 125#, trigger fired, bipod capable, optic outfitted tool was so difficult to utilize.

 

[highplainsdrifter]

This is a good point. highplainsdrifter, do you think guys competing in an archery tournament would be ok with one of the competitors using a crossbow? Because as you say there is no advantage.

I didn't say that crossbows have no advantage over compounds. Clearly, there are a few (such as not having to come to draw in front of an elk). But they much more closely resemble other archery equipment then rifles.

I have shot many archery tournaments with a compound bow (although not for a few years). In addition to not allowing crossbows, they typically don't allow rangefinders. So, would you suggest that someone go archery hunting without a rangefinder? I wouldn't dream of it.

Let's use the technology that is available to us to enable more people to enjoy the sport and enhance clean kills for the benefit of the animals we love.

 

[Zim]

I didn't say that crossbows have no
Let's use the technology that is available to us to enable more people to enjoy the sport and enhance clean kills for the benefit of the animals we love.

No. This is no more than a laughable justification for "shortcut the system". These same people you mention have been free to use the crossgun in the gun season. They are the ones who chose not to. It's all about some wanting to get around professional wildlife managers regulations to exploit the resource. Why don't you just make an argument for greased politicians managing our wildlife, because that is the real issue here. The truth. For some reason I don't see anyone here stepping forward to do that.