
REASONABLE CROSSBOW HUNTING RANGE: A REASONED STATEMENT
-
- Posts: 2411
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 11:32 am
- Location: North Carolina
I agree as well, my son shoots a Parker Buckshot ( youth model vert ). He can pull 46 lbs comfortablely with his bow and is a good shot out to 30 yds. However, WE feel because of his limited archery experience and the limitations of his equipment, his " personal maximum comfort hunting distance " is 20 yds. As for me and my exomag 35 yds is my max. 

God Bless !!!!!!!!!
Ray
Ray
-
- Posts: 6989
- Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:16 pm
Grizz . . .I agree with you. I love to get them in close because I know my chances of getting a clean kill increases with every step closer. I also know that the costs of human and mechanical error decrease the shorter the distance. I especially like the challenge of getting close to a deer, I mean touching them. . .that's fun. Ever touched a live wild deer . . .wow!
As a general rule . . .yeah ideally less than 30 yards. However, I'm not about to tell someone they shouldn't take a 50 or 60 yard shot unless I know that person's shooting skills, the weather conditions, the shooting environment, the prey, their experience and their equipment.
By the way . . .how would you propose to exceed the current limits of the general rule? How would it be tested? If everyone sticks to the general rule, then how will we get past it? What specific advancement would allow you to attempt a 70 yard shot? I guess the obvious question . . .is there a need to exceed it? If it's exceeded, will it take some of the "sport" out of archery?
There are a lot of guys out there testing new set-ups . . .trying to exceed the general limits. I think every sport needs these guys to keep the sport alive/exciting. Just like basketball needed Mr. Jordan and baseball needed Mr. Ruth. Somehow it brings excitement and that's a good thing. We need more bow shooters/hunters to keep this sport alive.
As a general rule . . .yeah ideally less than 30 yards. However, I'm not about to tell someone they shouldn't take a 50 or 60 yard shot unless I know that person's shooting skills, the weather conditions, the shooting environment, the prey, their experience and their equipment.
By the way . . .how would you propose to exceed the current limits of the general rule? How would it be tested? If everyone sticks to the general rule, then how will we get past it? What specific advancement would allow you to attempt a 70 yard shot? I guess the obvious question . . .is there a need to exceed it? If it's exceeded, will it take some of the "sport" out of archery?
There are a lot of guys out there testing new set-ups . . .trying to exceed the general limits. I think every sport needs these guys to keep the sport alive/exciting. Just like basketball needed Mr. Jordan and baseball needed Mr. Ruth. Somehow it brings excitement and that's a good thing. We need more bow shooters/hunters to keep this sport alive.
I'd rather wear out than rust out.
Perception trumps intention.
2006 Exomax w/Agingcrossbower Custom Stock
20" Easton Powerbolts w/125gr Trophy Ridge Stricknines & 2"Blazers
Boo Custom Strings
2006 Vixen
Perception trumps intention.
2006 Exomax w/Agingcrossbower Custom Stock
20" Easton Powerbolts w/125gr Trophy Ridge Stricknines & 2"Blazers
Boo Custom Strings
2006 Vixen
-
- Posts: 5701
- Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 8:36 pm
- Location: Decatur County, Indiana
Yes, our pursuit of game is in a constant state of flux ... that's the nature of human endeavor. The animals are the only constant in the equation, and even they adapt to many of our efforts.
Equipment and technique will always change, sometimes slightly over time, and sometimes in leaps and bounds. This will invariably affect our experiences in the field, and of course, the "general rules" we all know and observe.
I'm not against those who push the envelope in any way. Had it not been for the dreamers and innovators in our sport, we'd still be stabbing at game with fire-hardened branches; I suppose even that was an innovation at one time. No doubt people argued about how far you should reasonably take a stab at an animal with your sharpened sapling.
I think it will take a bow that genuinely shoots 400 fps + to push the 40 yard max rule, but I question the appearance of a weapon that at once affords that kind of performance and yet allows reasonably easy drawing, and is durable enough to stand the test of time.
We'll see. No doubt about that.
My statement did not spring from any noble ideas about range limitation or sporting ethics; if I could regularly and reliably kill deer with archery equipment at ranges beyond 40 yards, I certainly would. The wooded terrain I hunt is unbelievably tangled and thick compared to what many are used to; so much so that much of it is un-huntable without the assistance of hounds. In many cases I am forced to hunt paths or field edges ... and when a deer does pop out 60 yards from you on the side of a 4,000 acre ag field ... that's not all that far away, friends!
Nor am I any sort of elitist; I have long enjoyed bowhunting, and I have long enjoyed rifle hunting. I take as much joy in a precisely placed bullet as I do in a neatly applied broadhead.
I await advancements that will modify the rules, and will avail myself of such advantages as I think appropriate. If I can take a shot with reasonable certainty of a quick, clean kill, then I'm good to go.
Knowing my limits is my challenge.
Equipment and technique will always change, sometimes slightly over time, and sometimes in leaps and bounds. This will invariably affect our experiences in the field, and of course, the "general rules" we all know and observe.
I'm not against those who push the envelope in any way. Had it not been for the dreamers and innovators in our sport, we'd still be stabbing at game with fire-hardened branches; I suppose even that was an innovation at one time. No doubt people argued about how far you should reasonably take a stab at an animal with your sharpened sapling.
I think it will take a bow that genuinely shoots 400 fps + to push the 40 yard max rule, but I question the appearance of a weapon that at once affords that kind of performance and yet allows reasonably easy drawing, and is durable enough to stand the test of time.
We'll see. No doubt about that.
My statement did not spring from any noble ideas about range limitation or sporting ethics; if I could regularly and reliably kill deer with archery equipment at ranges beyond 40 yards, I certainly would. The wooded terrain I hunt is unbelievably tangled and thick compared to what many are used to; so much so that much of it is un-huntable without the assistance of hounds. In many cases I am forced to hunt paths or field edges ... and when a deer does pop out 60 yards from you on the side of a 4,000 acre ag field ... that's not all that far away, friends!
Nor am I any sort of elitist; I have long enjoyed bowhunting, and I have long enjoyed rifle hunting. I take as much joy in a precisely placed bullet as I do in a neatly applied broadhead.
I await advancements that will modify the rules, and will avail myself of such advantages as I think appropriate. If I can take a shot with reasonable certainty of a quick, clean kill, then I'm good to go.
Knowing my limits is my challenge.
Grizz
Until somebody invents a bow that will fire a bolt at the speed of sound or better, I feel limited to 35 yards or so.
Maybe, just maybe, if all factors were in my favour, I MIGHT stretch it to 40. I'm a good shot, but I've had to track poorly shot animals and I don't like it. I've never seen an animal walking around with a bolt or arrow stuck in it, but I know I would find that revolting.
I'm not an Inuit hunting because I must do it to feed myself or my family. Nor am I a farmer, not hunting but destroying, deer that are predating my crops.
I hunt for fun and I don't find it to be fun to take shots that are an unacceptable risk of other than a clean kill.
Maybe, just maybe, if all factors were in my favour, I MIGHT stretch it to 40. I'm a good shot, but I've had to track poorly shot animals and I don't like it. I've never seen an animal walking around with a bolt or arrow stuck in it, but I know I would find that revolting.
I'm not an Inuit hunting because I must do it to feed myself or my family. Nor am I a farmer, not hunting but destroying, deer that are predating my crops.
I hunt for fun and I don't find it to be fun to take shots that are an unacceptable risk of other than a clean kill.
"Gun Control Laws"--trying to nag criminals into submission.