Q&A for this column:
Q: What do you see as the greatest challenge to face bowhunting in the future. Question from my brother Don.
A. Regardless of the success of the current North American model of wildlife conservation it has future challenges like we have never seen before. In the year 2050 it is expected that the USA will have a population of 420 million (or about 119 people per square mile) and they will occupy about 20% of the land mass, that is up from 76 million people who occupied about 6% of our country (about 21 per square mile) in 1900 when real wildlife management began to take hold. Climate change will put enormous stress on many species, energy development/habitat disturbance will carve up much of the west and more disturbance of habitat from urbanization and less interest from the non-hunting public will create problems for the conservationist that make all the problems of the past pale in comparison. The bright spot is that Americans come together in the face of crises so I would not count our wildlife scientists out quite yet. Aldo Leopold described wildlife conservation as “a state of harmony between man and land,” maintaining that in the future is going to be a mighty big job!
……………………………………………………………
Is the Uproar over allowing the crossbow in the archery season a valid debate?
By Curtis Hermann
There is a large debate between bowhunters, bowhunting organizations, the archery-crossbow industry and the State Wildlife Agencies in this country over the inclusion of the crossbow into the archery or bowhunting season - how we got into this mess, may surprise you, why you may not be able to stop it is something you need to know and whether or not it is a valid debate is worth considering.
There are a lot of misconceptions in this issue, in order to understand them we need to explain a little of our history.
We were all raised to admire the bowhunting pioneers who originally fought the wars that got us our first bowhunting seasons. They were very important, but do you know how they accomplished it when they were powerfully opposed by millions of rifle hunters?
Think about it for a minute, 5 or 6 million riflemen who provided the money from their license fees to provide the entire budget of every state wildlife agency in the country, were opposed to having a special preseason for archers that numbered maybe 150,000 spread out over 48 states (1940’s). If you have the power in numbers and massive amounts of money, how did the little bitty archery community succeed in getting a special season? Here is the secret that our pioneer leaders knew and understood!
Every State Wildlife Agency has a Mission Statement or Directive from their State to provide opportunity for any “Reasonable Viable User Group!” The wording changes from state to state but the intent is the same. The opportunity to use this directive was a chance for growth for each individual Wildlife Agency.
The leaders of the Archery Industry (Fred Bear, Ben Pearson, Earl Hoyt, Harry Drake and many others) along with the leaders of each state’s archery or bowhunting association, the NFAA and later the Pope & Young Club were able to convince the state wildlife agencies that the interest was there, the archery industry was growing rapidly and they had proven that the equipment was effective and up to the job of harvesting big game. They proved they were a “Reasonable Viable User Group,” then the way was clear for each state to provide opportunity, to allow hunting with a bow and arrow. An act that changed hunting forever and opened the doors for other groups and seasons.
So now you understand that any group that can prove that they are a “Reasonable Viable User Group” can approach a State Wildlife Agency and ask that they provide them opportunity under the mandate of their Mission Statement or Directive. The crossbow groups, helped by the archery/crossbow industry and the NRA have successfully made that request.
The opposition from bowhunters has some sympathy from the various State Wildlife Agencies involved, however the state mandate or directive will trump the desires of the bowhunters and their supporting organizations.
Lets return back to the beginning.
Allowing archers the privilege to hunt is one thing but accomplishing a pre-season was a bit more difficult, we must remember that at the time there was only one season, the rifle season, asking for a pre-season did not take away any hunting days from any other group. Rifle season put a lot of pressure on the game, adding to that pressure was not a good idea, however providing a separate season was a reasonable thing to do and created a badly needed new source of income (bowhunters) to the state wildlife agency. Traditional archers with their primitive equipment needed near pristine conditions in order to be effective, so with the help of our bowhunting pioneers, it happened, the primitive weapons seasons became a reality, in spite of the anger and power of the much larger rifle contingency.
Accomplishing a separate season for our weapon of choice was history making and opened the door for other primitive weapons such as the Flintlock or Muzzleloader group. Eventually “special seasons” of all kinds covered more days than printed on a calendar, causing an overlapping of user groups. An example: some years ago I was enjoying the Pennsylvania Archery Season for several days when the Youth Squirrel Season began overlapping the last week of bow season, suddenly my quiet woods was disturbed by the boom of a shotgun, that loud explosion deterred a fine 6-point buck that was headed for my scent stick. It was one of those hunting moments that I will never forget.
The big question I get is, “why don’t the crossbow hunters fight for their own special season like we did?” At this point the answer to that question should be obvious, there is no room on the calendar for another special season! In the 1940’s that was a practical solution, today any special season would either overlap or take away days from someone else. Most likely those days would come from the current archery season. Not a good PR move. Rifle hunters still have power in what they spend and they outspend archers many times over, by virtue of that spending power they will not have to give up parts of their season. The State Agencies just simply cannot give up the income that would be involved in the decline of disappointed gun hunters.
Now you understand (through history) how the crossbow movement is able to move their agenda forward in spite of the opposition of the bowhunters.
There is another event that has helped produce the crossbow phenomenon. We need to jump forward from the 1940’s to 1969/1970.
Certainly when Hollis Wilber Allen and Tom Jennings brought us the hybrid called a compound bow; bowhunting took a giant leap into the future. In the excitement of this new weapon, little notice was paid to the fact that the definition of what is a “Primitive Weapon” was being permanently altered. In order for the compound to be allowed in the archery season, a silent understanding of acceptance came into being. In order that this new “unspoken” definition be accepted, the term “Traditional Bowhunter” was coined to recognize those archers left behind in this ground swell movement-who still clung to their Longbows and Recurves. The new term “Modern Archer” was now what the term “bowhunter” represented. By the way, a few short years later this same scenario took place with the introduction of the inline muzzleloader rifle into the flintlock season. Once a precedent has been set, unintended consequences appear.
Therefore we can reasonably surmise that the acceptance of “Compound Bow Technology” as “Primitive Archery Equipment” absolutely assured that the eventual acceptance of the “Compound Crossbow,” would also be accepted as “Primitive Archery Equipment.”
In a matter of a few short years this modern bowhunter with his compound technology began to produce good hunting success rates, gaining a position as a “Viable Game Management Tool”.
This too, was history in the making, as the traditional bowhunter had never been thought of as a useful tool for managing game, but with the addition of the compound bow things began to change dramatically.
Now we must jump forward to our current times. State Game Agencies burdened with burgeoning whitetail herds, declining hunter numbers and a low hunter recruitment rates are looking for help.
The archery industry looking for a way to grow a customer base utilized the compound technology to improve the crossbow, hoping it would create the kind of interest that it had in the archery world. It has! One improvement in equipment solves both problems; it creates new customers and gives Wildlife Agencies a new management tool. Can we say Deja’vu, 1940’s?
By sharing the same technology, the compound (vertical bow) and the crossbow (horizontal bow) have become the “kissing cousins” of modern archery equipment. The science (Law of Physics) says a compound bow of 70 pounds draw weight at 30”and a compound crossbow of 140 pounds of draw weight at 16” and -with both bows shooting identical arrow weight- will produce approximately the same kinetic energy and therefore similar down range performance. True to the laws of physics, but if you have ever shot both bows you will instantly see a difference in ease of use and ability to hit a target with the crossbow.
There is as much difference between the compound and the crossbow in the archer’s ability to become proficient as there is between the traditional recurve or longbow and the compound bow. That’s just how it is!
If the compound bowhunter is not at ease with the performance and ease of accuracy of the crossbow in the woods during archery season, he needs to remember that –that is exactly the same feeling the traditional bowhunter has of sharing the woods with the compound bowhunter.
I work hard at shooting a traditional bow well, my scores say I succeed. Every few months I pick up my compound and shoot a qualified NFAA Field or Hunter Round and equal or improve upon those same scores shot with traditional equipment, without any (or little) previous practice. However some sacrifice of that primitive feeling is part of the deal.
I recently had the opportunity to shoot the new PSE TAC15 Crossbow in a controlled environment (indoor shooting range) and was quite taken back by the ease of shooting, the accuracy and the power of a 399’ per second arrow. The scope settled easily on the bulls-eye, the four-pound trigger pull was smooth and easy, the slap of the bowstring and the thud of the arrow hitting the target were but milliseconds apart and the instantaneous reaction was a visual memory that flashed trough my mind of the last time I shot my lever action 30-30 rifle, 40 years ago. I could not relate to this weapon as archery equipment, it just surpassed my comfort level to a point that I related it to its closest memory; which was the old 30-30.
Now the truth is that the compound (vertical bow or crossbow) does not approach anything near the performance level of a firearm (even a 30-30). In fact, with every bit of the latest in modern technology applied, the fastest modern compound (vertical bow or crossbow) at best will double the speed of my traditional equipment.
Fact: If those are the stats that justify their inclusion in the category of primitive weapon, then that is where they will stay!
However the point I am trying to make is that much of the emotional experience that is gained by using traditional equipment is lost with the performance provided by these modern incarnations of a primitive weapon. It is exactly that same emotional experience that is at the root of the current effort by bowhunters to stop the inclusion of the crossbow in the archery or bowhunting season! The degree of loss of the primitive feeling is the same with the compound archer experiencing the compound crossbow, as it is with the traditional archer experiencing the compound.
So will the bowhunters succeed in stopping the crossbow from joining the archery season? The answer to that question (depending on the needs of your state) is likely a resounding NO! This year alone four states (New Jersey, West Virginia, Pennsylvania* and Texas) have approved the use of the crossbow in the archery season, despite the best efforts of some organizations in the archery community going all out to stop the crossbow.
The following is why bowhunters cannot win in this battle to keep the crossbow out of the archery-hunting season. The needs of your State Wildlife Agency prevail. Hunter retention, recruitment and the ability to manage a burgeoning game herd are the points that count, that is the way it should be. Equal consideration has been given to bowhunter retention/recruitment and game management. The compound crossbow and the compound vertical bow are closer to each other in performance than either is to a firearm. These facts outweigh the wishes of the compound bowhunter’s efforts to maintain a sense of the primitive experience. The argument the bowhunter puts forward is that the crossbow is not archery equipment, perhaps so, but because the bowhunting compound archer is sharing the exact same power stroke technology as the crossbowman’s weapon, the compound bowhunter will lose this argument.
The purpose of this article is to inform the bowhunter/crossbow hunter of the deciding factors of this issue, not the arguments for or against put out by the opposing sides. All states have a hunter recruitment and retention problem; these alone may not cause the states to include the crossbow in the archery season. However if your state is facing a burgeoning whitetail herd along with the other two problems, it is most likely that you will soon be sharing the woods with a crossbow hunter in your archery season. Political pressure aside, the Game Agencies need to respond to the needs of the “Viable User Group” and to the solutions needed to manage game numbers.
The crossbow hunter has proven he has the interest (numbers of users) and an effective weapon; (thanks primarily to compound power stroke technology) he is therefore a “Reasonable Viable User Group.” His timing couldn’t be better as Wildlife Agencies are in need of new tools to help manage the game herd in many states. This is about as simple as I can make it, hopefully it has increased your understanding of this current issue. I take no sides in the issue here, I’m just stating the realities and trying to explain through history why the crossbow hunter is just another American hunter looking to establish himself in the most logical season for his equipment. Due to the fact that the performance factors of his equipment being closer to the compound bow than the 30-30rifle and the fact that the accepted definition of a primitive weapon includes compound technology, the archery season is where he will find a home.
One last comment, the Pope & Young Club has shown that recruitment and retention statistics used by most states to justify the inclusion of the crossbow in the archery season do not include the numbers of archers that drop out of bowhunting, refusing to hunt the woods while the crossbow archer is there. That, in the long run, there may actually be less retention and less recruitment with the introduction of the crossbow in the archery season. I believe that the State Game Agencies will give this some consideration, but will take a “wait and see” attitude and watch the long term future statistics for confirmation. In the meantime, decisions to include the crossbow into the archery season will continue.
So is this war of bowhunters against crossbow hunters a valid debate? Once you consider the history, the currently accepted definition of “primitive weapons” technology and the needs of the state Wildlife Agencies, well, as they say at “Fox News”- we report, you decide.
As a traditional equipment bowhunter, for philosophical reasons, I tend to disapprove of the use of compounds, compound crossbows or of inline muzzleloaders in either of the primitive weapons seasons. However if it requires the inclusion of these weapons to keep the number of hunters up, to entice a new younger generation to engage in hunting, then I reluctantly concede to the needs of the solution. I certainly would prefer that we make a concerted effort to make actual primitive weapons (longbows, recurves and flintlocks) more attractive to both the current and younger generation as a solution; I also recognize that this is an elitist position that will not solve the current problems facing the bowhunting and wildlife management communities.
I do welcome your comments on this column, whether you’re a bowhunter, wildlife professional or industry (vertical bow and/or crossbow) representative. If I am right or wrong in your mind, or if you would just like to comment, I would appreciate your point of view. Please feel free to express yourself, my email address is: onerobinhood@roadrunner.com
*The original Pennsylvania Game Board of Commissioners ruling did not allow for magnifying scopes to be allowed on crossbows during the archery season, that ruling was reversed on April 21, 2009 by the ruling board.
No comments:
Post a Comment