thank you... I love all hunting tools and I am not a person who will condone the bashing of anyone on this forum and I will hold people accountable for it.
Crossed over to the other side
- Thread starter Peeps
- Start date
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
I'm only trying to say that "resource" means different things to different folks and that adding crossbows as a weapon increases the amount of recreational hunting opportunity for more folks while having a tiny impact on harvest compared to other tools like the number of doe days during firearms season. Wolves and bears are not direct management tools because they can not be manipulated directly. It is true that managing their numbers impacts deer populations. I'm also trying to say that one can strongly disagree with the management goals in their state, but the introduction of crossbows will likely have little impact if any on the populations based on data from states that currently have them. In our state the regulations are reviewed and changed on a 2 year cycle. The addition or reduction of a single doe day during firearm season in a county has more impact on the population than the entire bow season.
In my state, you can only shoot bearded birds in the spring (regardless of sex). In the fall you can shoot any turkey. We get 3 turkey tags per year. Only 1 of those tags is good in the fall. So, you can shoot a maximum of 3 gobblers in the spring or 2 gobblers in the spring and 1 either sex in the fall. I like having good turkey populations. They work well with deer and provide another hunting opportunity. I've killed many gobblers in the spring over the years with a shotgun. I've taken a few jakes and hens with a crossbow in recent years in the fall. Last year was my first turkey (hen) with a vertical bow. The present a great challenge for me.
Thanks,
Jack
Last edited:
j-bird
Moderator
All I know is that my daughter wants to go hunting this weekend and my crossbow will afford her that opportunity.....she is 12. Without it I would never spend the money for her to have her own set-up due to the cost and how quickly their interests change. We will put some bolt/arrows into a target tonight and be in the woods in the morning. She may or may not shoot given the results, but a x-bow gives me and her that flexibility. Maybe it takes less skill, however it is a great bridge into other methods of archery that may not otherwise have been an option.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
That speaks to the BCC and topic of what is the "resource" that Sandbur brought up. Trying to work out what resource one is trying to manage is a key question. What level of deer, turkey, wolves, bear, non-game species, recreational opportunity, economics ....
Since everyone has different vested interests, folks will prefer a different weighting for each of these and probably many more. That is why the objectives folks manage for is a political decision. Some how all of those interests must be balanced. There will always be those who fair better and worse based on the decisions made.
Thanks,
Jack
sandbur
5 year old buck +
We don't have doe days. If you have a doe tag , it is good for any day the season is open.
Every archery tag is an either sex tag. A bunch of new crossbow hunters would be many more doe tags and could have a serious effect in a doe lottery area. Especially at the slow rate our state reacts to fluctuations in the deer population.
Additional hunting pressure by any extended seasons should only be done in areas with deer populations at or above goals.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
But you could have doe days. The point is that there are a lot of possible tools that game departments can use to manage populations. It sounds to me like your problem is more one of how to slice the pie between different hunters rather than a population management issue. I really like the doe days approach our state uses on a county by county basis for public lands. It is only for modern firearms which account for the largest share of the harvest. For more primitive weapons which account for a small percentage of the harvest we don't have doe days and only a tag is required.
I certainly see your point if your state has a lottery system for does as the state I grew up in did. More hunters applying reduces your chances. I'm glad I moved to a state with a more progressive game department.
Thanks,
Jack
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
Can you explain more?
Peeps
5 year old buck +
Well said!! Good luck this weekend. Hunting with my kids are by far the best hunting memories I have.
bueller
Moderator
T-Zone were antlerless only seasons that the WDNR instituted back in the early 2000's. Firearms were legal to hunt with and tags were cheap and plentiful. Our traditional rifle season is 9 days running from the Saturday before Thanksgiving through the Sunday after. The T-Zones were 4 days long and scheduled before and after the traditional season. The early one was in October. It was really a sad sight to see. Small bucks were mistaken for does and shot dead by hunters and left to rot in the woods. Trailer loads of does were being brought to the registration stations. And to top it off every year we had an early T-Zone our traditional gun season sucked because of all the early pressure and fewer deer on the landscape. The WI legislature has since banned the WDNR from having these T-Zone style hunts.
bueller
Moderator
Here is an example of just one county. Yes some areas of the county don't have much if any public and lots of farms and they are still doing just fine. But for those of us in the forested area with abundant public lands our herd is still down. The public lands are WAY down to this date and will probably never be the same.
Sorry but... crossbows make me cringe. I hate the fact that wisconsin has made them available to everyone. Now everyone is a "bowhunter" which granted is what the DNR wants... but the last thing i wanted was more people in the woods. Prime example last year. An uncle who has always been anti bow hunter calling us all "pork and beaners" picks up the cross bow in october and shoots a 160" 10 point over a pile over corn (rusk county so its legal) that i have been watching the last few years trying to figure out and been hunting the ethical way. Really cute. At least vertical bows required some preparation and skill. I shot his just to see and was instantly hitting bulls-eyes out to 60 yards... would love to see someone try that with a compound. You would be digging arrows out of the dirt. Old or disabled; go for it. But otherwise i feel like you should at least be presented with some sort of challenge with a 3 month long season.[/QUOTE
Excuse me sir, but U r selfish, misinformed biased individual w/ a warped 'brain' ().
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
I should be clear about what "doe days" are in my area. Here, we have both daily and seasonal limits. We have tags. For deer you are issued Either Sex tags and Antlerless only tags. Tags are by hunter and cannot be used by other hunters. You need both a tag and to be hunting on a day when the deer you harvest is in-season. During archery season, both sexes are in during the entire season. Harvests during archery are a small fraction of the total state harvest. During modern firearms season, the length of the season depends on the area (county or group of adjoin counties) and Antlered deer are legal during the entire season. There are typically a few days during the season when it is legal to take either sex. We call those days "doe days". This is the first order control for managing population. When the objective for the county is reduce, the number of doe days is generally increased. When the objective is increase, the number of doe days is reduced, and when the objective is stabilize it is in the middle. It is certainly possible that doe days could be reduced to zero of the game department felt it was necessary in a particular area due to an acute EHD epidemic or some similar occurrence. I have seen zero doe days on some small state owned wildlife management areas located near urban centers that have their own special regulations.
Things like archery seasons, the use of crossbows, and such are primarily aimed at providing more recreational opportunities for more people since the impact on population is dwarfed by the impact of changing the number of doe days. Perhaps if we ever get to crisis levels and the number of doe days went to zero one might need to look at reducing archery seasons or tags or some similar measure.
It sounds to me like the argument I'm hearing is more one of a hunters disagreeing with the population objectives that your DNR is managing toward rather than an argument against crossbows.
Thanks,
Jack
bueller
Moderator
Interesting. Up here bucks are legal throughout archery and gun season. And antlerless permits are not weapon specific and they are valid throughout the archery and gun seasons also. The only real control method the WDNR currently uses is the number of antlerless tags issued per county.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
I probably wasn't clear again. That is almost the same here. Bucks are legal through archery and gun season provided you have an either-sex tag. Antlerless deer are legal through out archery season, but only on certain days during modern firearm season as long as you have either an either-sex or antlerless tag. Tags are issued when you purchase your big game license regardless of where you live. Tags are primarily used to allocate deer between hunters. Most tags go unfilled. They are a secondary means of population control. The actual regulations are a bit more complex, but this covers most public land hunting.
I think they view folks hunting public land as having a hard time taking a long-view but think private landowners have more of a long-term vested interest. I know when I'm hunting public land late in the season and have an unfilled either-sex tag, it is harder to pass a young buck since I know there is a high chance he will be shot by the next guy. I have no problem passing bucks on private land with controlled hunting. They sell "bonus antlerless tags" good only on private land. You can buy as many as you like in most years and areas. This lets landowners who want lower deer numbers (farmers experiencing damage) to allow hunters to take high numbers of deer from their property. Perhaps this offsets landowners who don't allow hunting. This gives private property owners more opportunity to decide how their land is managed; at least to some extent.
The also offer specific programs for private land owners. I participate in a deer management plan. With this plan, we must collect measurements and biological samples from every deer harvested for the game department. In turn, they give us a number of free antlerless tags each year. These special tags have the advantage of being good on non-doe-days. This is a site specific example of managing by the number of tags.
The state I grew up in had a county by county lottery for antlerless tags similar to the one you describe. I like the system they have here much better.
Thanks,
Jack
Greta&Gus
5 year old buck +
100%.
Maddog3355
5 year old buck +
I had to go the crossbow route to this year. After starting out with a recurve then a bear whitetail I have been archery hunting for awhile. My first impressions of a crossbow are they are not much of an advantage. There heavy cumbersome and very hard to cock. Out past 20 yards I need a rest. Out past 30 yards you have to have 5 yard increments because of the light arrow, and there very noisy. But you gots to do what you gots to do!! I hunt with some guys that are machines when it come to vertical bows. They have the one pin HHA sights and shoot 20 to 80 yards with extreme accuracy. If the pain is more than the pleasure get a crossbow.
yoderjac
5 year old buck +
yQUOTE="yoderjac, post: 122188, member: 1517"]...
It sounds to me like the argument I'm hearing is more one of a hunters disagreeing with the population objectives that your DNR is managing toward rather than an argument against crossbows.
Thanks,
Jack[/QUOTE]
So, my point is that crossbows can add more recreational opportunity and keep more folks in the sport and if managed properly and can have a negligible impact on population compared to firearm hunting. Older folks who don't feel comfortable with their wounding rate using a vertical bow as they physically decline (strength, eyesight, etc.) are retained slowing attrition and younger folks that have not yet developed the strength and skills can enter the sport sooner. With low success rates of bowhunting compared to firearm hunting, longer seasons provide more recreational opportunity with little impact on population. There are tools that game departments can use to manage population in such a way that the addition of crossbows to bowhunting have a negligible impact on population.
To clarify, when I originally said I thought we might be conflating things, I meant that the introduction of crossbows into bowhunting in a state is a different discussion than how a game department sets population objectives.
So there are really three different topics:
1) Has the state done a good job of balancing the interests and establishing good population targets.
2) Is the game department using the best tools to achieve those objectives.
3) Should cross-bows be added to the bowhunting weapons in the state.
Thanks,
Jack
It sounds to me like the argument I'm hearing is more one of a hunters disagreeing with the population objectives that your DNR is managing toward rather than an argument against crossbows.
Thanks,
Jack[/QUOTE]
So, my point is that crossbows can add more recreational opportunity and keep more folks in the sport and if managed properly and can have a negligible impact on population compared to firearm hunting. Older folks who don't feel comfortable with their wounding rate using a vertical bow as they physically decline (strength, eyesight, etc.) are retained slowing attrition and younger folks that have not yet developed the strength and skills can enter the sport sooner. With low success rates of bowhunting compared to firearm hunting, longer seasons provide more recreational opportunity with little impact on population. There are tools that game departments can use to manage population in such a way that the addition of crossbows to bowhunting have a negligible impact on population.
To clarify, when I originally said I thought we might be conflating things, I meant that the introduction of crossbows into bowhunting in a state is a different discussion than how a game department sets population objectives.
So there are really three different topics:
1) Has the state done a good job of balancing the interests and establishing good population targets.
2) Is the game department using the best tools to achieve those objectives.
3) Should cross-bows be added to the bowhunting weapons in the state.
Thanks,
Jack
Last edited:
Catscratch
5 year old buck +
Are you saying that Kansas is putting hunters first right now? That they are using good biological studies to make decisions for hunting regulations? That adding crossbows to a 3 month archery season in a state with declining deer numbers was their tool to manage harvest based on data collection? I say their actions point towards using politics to grub money and boast false numbers in a declining state economy.
By merging the Department of Wildlife and Parks with Tourism, they took the power from the biologists and put it in legislators hands (one legislator was quoted as saying he wanted to add crossbows because his beans had deer in it every morning so there must be too many deer, we should add crossbows so that there will be less crop damage). There are no harvest reports anymore. No check-ins. We no longer send teeth in so the State can have data on age classes. Last yr the State determined they were going to issue an added 3000 tags to "meet demand" because they had more applications than tags. I fail to see where "Wildlife biologists collect data that can be used to estimate the impacts (intended and unintended) of particular management techniques used to achieve those objectives.". We have a declining herd, there is no data collection or actual harvest reports, and the State is making it ever easier to issue tags.
