# Shooting with a bow ethically.....



## #1DEER 1-I (Sep 10, 2007)

Just thought I would post this to say, DO NOT, DO NOT be shooting a deer in the rump and expect to kill it. I met a guy the second day of the bow hunt who said:


> All I could see was a** of him so I took the shot I could


 come on dose anyone actually think a deer is going to die if you shoot it on the side of its butt just above the back leg? Long story short the deer was never found by the guy, he got his arrow that broke off but the broadhead was still in the deer. Just a deer that is going to waste for no good reason other than a guy who took a shot that was absolutly stupid. Come on people shoot to kill not to wound and waste.


----------



## campfire (Sep 9, 2007)

I agree. The big knock on archery hunting is the high percentage of wounded loss. I think this has decreased in recent years with the introduction of "choose your weapon" as most archers are now more dedicated to their sport and thus more conscientious about taking ethical shots and being more dedicated and skilled in follow up tracking. There are obviously some exceptions though. Perhaps this thread should be moved to the archery section where more archers will read it.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I was about to state that I agree, but I just can't agree with anything you say 1I; it would make you think that you were on to something and it might make you think that you are right about trucks and I don't want that for a minute. I think we would all be amazed by some of the stories that I have heard from some of the yahoos out there. Last year a guy told me, wearing woodland camo no less, I thought that stuff was banned back in '89 :wink: , about how he just shot a nice 4pt where we knew there was nothing of size at all on what I believe to be posted property maybe, and how he hit it and tracked it for hours to no avail. I then saw him practice shooting and he lost two arrows from 20 yards (about 3 different kinds of arrows in his quiver *\-\* *\-\* ) I can appreciate not having money for the latest and greatest, but I am sure that you can match 4 arrows to shoot so they at least shoot somewhat consistently; so that kind of filled in the missing info as to what really happened most likely; a crappy shot can be just as damaging as a stupid shot unfortunately. I have also heard first hand the "hold a little high" type of explanation too how it would be so much cooler to hit one from way out :evil: . And those who just plain do not put any time in practicing and miss 3-4 deer every day injuring who knows how many by just barely hitting them; I believe it is fairly rare, but very disappointing at any level of existence, I wish some would take a clean kill more seriously.

The scariest part of your story 3I is that the fellar did not believe it to even be unethical or he would not have shared it with a stranger, right? Hopefully you were able to carefully inform him of his stupidity as I did with my experience.


----------



## blackbear (Oct 18, 2007)

Now that Im hunting with my recurve, I have found that it more about learning when not to shoot, than when to shoot. I get that buck fever and ask myself if I should take a lob, but luckly my sober mind wins. It really is quite a disciplined sport. Guess thats one of the reasons I love it so much. 
If/when I see someone making those kinds of mistakes- Ill let 'em know. Aint nothing more diminishing to a hunter to be teased by a stranger. Hand 'em their lunch.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

A mandatory Bowhunter Education Class? With shooting?


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

blackbear said:


> I have found that it more about learning when not to shoot, than when to shoot. I get that buck fever and ask myself if I should take a lob, but luckly my sober mind wins. It really is quite a disciplined sport. Guess thats one of the reasons I love it so much.


Agreed... even if I do hunt with training wheels. Second guessed the hell out of myself all afternoon but when it was all said and done, was glad I didn't take a shot just for shooting's sake. I did shoot my bow yesterday, but only after the deer had spooked and were out of the area.


----------



## torowy (Jun 19, 2008)

elkfromabove said:


> A mandatory Bowhunter Education Class? With shooting?


im sick of so many classes


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

elkfromabove said:


> A mandatory Bowhunter Education Class? With shooting?


Ding Ding Ding!!!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> elkfromabove said:
> 
> 
> > A mandatory Bowhunter Education Class? With shooting?
> ...


Wrong wrong wrong! Making some slob take a course when he has NO DESIRE to learn will gain him NOTHING. But, it will cost the DWR money/time/resources. I am in favor of VOLUNTARY BE, with possible incentives like a 'free' bonus point to attend/pass. The DH mandated RAC meeting attendance is evidence on why/how mandating classes/courses/meetings gains little for those being forced to attend, and takes away from those wanting to be there.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> Making some slob take a course when he has NO DESIRE to learn will gain him NOTHING.


EXACTLY! May be the apathetic slob with no desire, ambition, or ethics will just say " I'm not takin' no stupid test." Then he wont hunt. GOOD. Less sh*tty fringe for me to deal with in the field and less dirtbag slob hunters giving us all a black eye.

Bowhunter Ed should be mandatory in every state nationwide. JUST like hunter safety for the rifle people.

Plus, we could train people in the private sector to give the courses and make a little money on the side while teaching it. Then the state needs not worry about spending their precious elk money. Just like drivers ed or concealed carry permits, set the standard curriculum and make sure the private teachers are teaching it.

Like a wise man ones said, "there's more than one way to skin a cat..."


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> EXACTLY! May be the apathetic slob with no desire, ambition, or ethics will just say " I'm not takin' no stupid test." Then he wont hunt. GOOD. Less sh*tty fringe for me to deal with in the field and less dirtbag slob hunters giving us all a black eye.
> 
> Bowhunter Ed should be mandatory in every state nationwide. JUST like hunter safety for the rifle people.


First, hunter safety is for ALL hunters, not just rifle hunters, so making archers take ANOTHER course and not require the SAME expectations on rifle/muzzy hunters is BS!

Second, I don't like slob hunters either. But, the slob's will STILL take/pass the course, but will STILL be slobs! So, all that would be accomplished is MORE restrictions for the 'good' hunters, and little/nothing done about the slob hunters! I contend that having more people calling out the slob hunters like bear did over the weekend will do far more to stop/slow the slob hunter mentality than a mandated course!


----------



## widgeon_whopper (Jul 26, 2008)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> > Making some slob take a course when he has NO DESIRE to learn will gain him NOTHING.
> 
> 
> EXACTLY! May be the apathetic slob with no desire, ambition, or ethics will just say " I'm not takin' no stupid test." Then he wont hunt. GOOD. Less sh*tty fringe for me to deal with in the field and less dirtbag slob hunters giving us all a black eye.
> ...


+1 Well put tex!


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

I've taken the class... bowhunter education. Got the card and everything. It honestly isn't that bad and shooting for your pass... well, if you want to get good, you need to practice so its not like its a huge putoff to have to go shoot your bow for an hour or two. There is some good stuff in the class that some people probably don't think about so I think if there were incentives offered for having taken the class, that might take some of the bitterness away about it.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> First, hunter safety is for ALL hunters, not just rifle hunters, so making archers take ANOTHER course and not require the SAME expectations on rifle/muzzy hunters is BS!


Oh c'mon Pro! Gimmy a break! I took hunter safety and the amount of "Bowhunter" education I received in that class was pathetic at best. Hunter safety caters mostly to hunting with *firearms* NOT archery tackle. With the added skill, common sense, woodsmanship, anatomy knowledge, tracking ability, distance judging, etc. etc. one must posses to be efficient at bowhunting there needs to be a separate course. A *mandatory* separate course!

More is demanded of a bowhunter in the field so more should be demanded to qualify you to be out there in the first place.

You can argue with me all night on this one Pro, but I'm right and you're WRONG. Get over it! :twisted:


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> I think if there were incentives offered for having taken the class, that might take some of the bitterness away about it.


How about "If you don't pass, you don't hunt!" Is that a good enough incentive!


----------



## jhunter (Dec 14, 2007)

Wow I am with Pro on this one. I dont see anything wrong with more education but you accomplish nothing with it being mandatory. If you want there to be greater focus on Archery address it in the hunter safety class that is already required.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

16 states now require bowhunter ed. It's coming to Utah...just a matter of time. I'm betting it will start with some new hunts where it will be required in order to draw a tag. Then more incentives will be added and as the infrastructure is developed, it'll eventually become a requirement for everybody. Can't happen soon enough.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> > I think if there were incentives offered for having taken the class, that might take some of the bitterness away about it.
> 
> 
> How about "If you don't pass, you don't hunt!" Is that a good enough incentive!


Well yeah... trouble is, thats easy enough to accomplish. I guess offering any other sort of incentive would probably wind up making the other guys a bit upset though.


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Like a wise man ones said, "there's more than one way to skin a cat..."


I have always just cased them. What other methods do you use?


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

jhunter said:


> Wow I am with Pro on this one. I dont see anything wrong with more education but you accomplish nothing with it being mandatory. If you want there to be greater focus on Archery address it in the hunter safety class that is already required.


That's a good idea. Make bowhunter ed part of the hunter ed course. Also, have bowhunters pass a shooting test just like the firearms test before then get "certified" to hunt with archery equipment.

Right now there just isn't enough education for archery hunters. Most newbies are learning their skills by watching FMP movies. :? WTF Over!

It's never been good. Back when I started bowhunting I thought you needed a heavier bow in the winter cuz their hide hot tougher and harder to penetrate. I thought getting an arrow in a deer was all you needed to do because the Satelite broadhead was so deadly effective. I thought success was measured by how many shots I got of in a season and I had even more success if I hit a couple in the process. Actually "killing" and finding one was just icing on the cake. My dear ol dad thought the most effective way to hunt deer with a bow was to post me up in a pass and push deer by me. My GOD, it's a wonder I ever learned how to bowhunt at all! If there would have been a mandatory class teaching me all the things I needed to know before going into the woods My learning curve would have been a LOT less steep and fewer animals would have been maimed. It's a sad day when you can learn more about bowhunting by watching a Primos video than you can at your required hunter safety course. Something needs to change.


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> My dear ol dad thought the most effective way to hunt deer with a bow was to post me up in a pass and push deer by me.


You lost me here. What is wrong with that? In the West where the terrain is wide open and very noisy, dry and Rocky, I think this is a very good system in working together and getting deer. I'm just glad that the native Americans would be very sneaky instead of doing this method or we would not have ANY animals left.  Let me ask you this. Can you picture Geronimo or Sitting Bull sitting in a tree stand? That's what I thought..........Me neither.  It works though, doesn't it? :mrgreen:


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

22, I NEVER got a good shot at a buck that was "pushed". They're on high alert, they're usually moving, and they never go where you think the will. Pushing deer works well for rifle hunters but not bowhunting in my book.

Spooking a deer so it will run past another hunter with a bow is not what I would call high percentage bowhunting. :?


----------



## Longgun (Sep 7, 2007)

SHOULDNT be the method of choice for any hunter! beit traditional hunter or rifle hunter.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Spooking a deer so it will run past another hunter with a bow is not what I would call high percentage bowhunting. :?


Is there such a thing as "high percentage bow hunting? _(O)_

Just because "16" states require bow hunter education courses does NOT mean it is productive/effective. It just means it makes people FEEL better about the situation. Most of the griping I am hearing/reading is about _ethics_, and _ethics_ is NOT just an archery issue. So, if we are that worried about _ethics_, add that into the hunter safety course for ALL hunters. I think poor shot selection, out of effective range shots, carelessness, are uniform across ALL weapon types. That is why I object a course just for archers, it's like archers are admitting they have more slob hunters than the other weapon hunters, which I do NOT believe. Being "PC" just for the sake of being "PC" is not my idea of good policy.


----------



## jhunter (Dec 14, 2007)

I thought scare and stalk was the best method of hunting!  Well it is the method that I am best at. :lol: 
So is the question education or ethics. Because I believe that ethics start at home, you cant teach people to be responcible in an already short Hunters Ed. class. That has been one of the biggest things I have focused on with my own kids. How, when, and why!


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

Although the past couple years I have not actively taught a Bow Ed class. I have taught an extreme amount of archers/bowhunters over the years the NBEF. Some took the class simply because they had to in order to hunt in a state requiring the class. Not once in all the classes or students did I have anyone leave without learning, appreciating and thanking me for my efforts. PRO may argue some were just being PC, if they were I guess I was fooled. Of course I have not taught PRO so maybe there is someone out there who would find the class useless. Do I beleive it should be mandatory It wouldn't hurt. Do I beleive it would make a difference definetly. Ethics are interesting, however over the years I have learned a couple of things do effect ethics one being education.
For those who feel a generic education is enough, I would assume they have no problem going to a gynecologist for prostrate. Afterall they both passed medical school.

FYI in Cache Valley we have tracked our bowed graduates, for not being a productive course it is interesting that on average they harvest about twices as often as the published bow rates. More interesting is the number of them that become actively involved in leadership roles in bowhunting organizations. Yes you may not change all however those you do help are well worth the effort.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

mulepacker said:


> I have taught an extreme amount of archers/bowhunters over the years the NBEF. Some took the class simply because they had to in order to hunt in a state requiring the class. Not once in all the classes or students did I have anyone leave without learning, appreciating and thanking me for my efforts. PRO may argue some were just being PC, if they were I guess I was fooled. Of course I have not taught PRO so maybe there is someone out there who would find the class useless. Do I beleive it should be mandatory It wouldn't hurt. Do I beleive it would make a difference definetly. Ethics are interesting, however over the years I have learned a couple of things do effect ethics one being education.
> For those who feel a generic education is enough, I would assume they have no problem going to a gynecologist for prostrate. Afterall they both passed medical school.
> 
> FYI in Cache Valley we have tracked our bowed graduates, for not being a productive course it is interesting that on average they harvest about twices as often as the published bow rates. More interesting is the number of them that become actively involved in leadership roles in bowhunting organizations. Yes you may not change all however those you do help are well worth the effort.


Come on Travis, you are guilty of hyperbole here! I NEVER said/implied that the courses aren't beneficial and/or "useless" to those who take the courses WILLINGLY! *NEVER!*

As for the gynecologist checking my prostrate, you are missing the point. The call for the course is to teach _ethics_, and I want my wife's gynecologists and my butt doctor to have good _ethics _. So, lets have an _ethics_ course for ALL hunters, not just bow hunters!

I am all for educating sportsmen, but when it is forced schooling, the education is often not there. Think back to school, when you were FORCED to go to school how serious did you take it? Me, I did just enough to graduate. But, when I went to college *BY MY CHOICE*, I actually learned, and I got more out of what was being taught. So, I am fine with the courses being available, but I am NOT fine with the courses being mandatory. I see it a waste of resources/time.


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

PRO, 
Define my hyperbole? I guess I don't understand. If the doctor "analogy" is what you are talking about I guess it's perception. I see bowhunting as specialized within the field of hunting, some additional education is a benefit.

However in my post I indicated there have been folks there simply because they "had to". I would dare say in most cases those folks actually were the most complimentary of the course. Otherwise the course exceeded their expectations.

You are sadly mistaken bowed is not to teach ethics, yes it does address ethics. However, if you read the fundamentals of Bowed it quickly becomes apparent that ethics are not taught but discussed within the course. What bowed does teach is safety, blood trailing, when to shoot where to aim, hunting methods with a specific flavor to bowhunting.
With your extreme criticism of the course I would assume you have taken the course however if you have not I challenge you to take the course and then decide on its benefit. 

As I said I am not sure if I support mandatory, I do however know that bowed will be the answer to many of the issues we will face as bowhunters, including more opportunity.
I may not understand the force issue, since I was a young boy I have always seen education as an opportunity.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

mulepacker said:


> You are sadly mistaken bowed is not to teach ethics, yes it does address ethics. However, if you read the fundamentals of Bowed it quickly becomes apparent that ethics are not taught but discussed within the course. What bowed does teach is safety, blood trailing, when to shoot where to aim, hunting methods with a specific flavor to bowhunting.
> With your extreme criticism of the course I would assume you have taken the course however if you have not I challenge you to take the course and then decide on its benefit.
> 
> As I said I am not sure if I support mandatory, I do however know that bowed will be the answer to many of the issues we will face as bowhunters, including more opportunity.
> I may not understand the force issue, since I was a young boy I have always seen education as an opportunity.


I SAID that most on HERE that are supporting bow ed are saying it is to instill _ethics_, not that it is mostly what the bow ed course(s) teach. But, in your own words you said it teaches "blood trailing, when to shoot, where to aim", those are _ETHICAL _ items that apply to ALL hunters, not just bow hunters.

I also have NEVER "criticized" the course, just the mandating of it. I am sure it would be of value to those who attend it WILLINGLY, myself included even after 25 years of bow hunting.

You may be a "nerd" if you have always liked school, even when 'forced' to attend. :wink: MOST humans do NOT obtain as much knowledge when it is crammed down their throat as they do when they seek learning. That is human nature, not something unique to bow hunters. I am guessing if I FORCED you to take a course on hair removal from big fat women you would get less out of it than an optional course on animal biology at Utah State. True?


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

Don't skirt my question Define Hyperbole!!! A course on removing hair from big fat women would be a hyperbole. You see it is a gross exageration. However FYI I grew up in a beauty shop, as my mother owned some. Fortunately I did take a course on hair removal, it helped put me through my college days at USU. I may be a nerd but even a class on hair removal became an opportunity. 

I won't argue with you for the sake of arguing. So yes I guess when deciding to take a life and what effort to put forth on recovery then blood trailing where to shoot when to aim could definetly be considered ethics. However, I would assure you most students realize improved "skills" from these topics, much like braking and acceleration when discussed in driving courses. I would assume you could consider braking and accelerating as ethical questions also if you wanted to argue.

My arguement to you is this: from teaching many folks who were "forced" to take the course I have learned all did find a benefit in it and expressed gratitude for the learning opprtunity.
I beleive the course has succeeded in turning out more prepared and educated bowhunters as a whole. Would this then not improve or increase the ethics of the bowhunting community as a whole?
Is your opinion based on any factual information or just your opinoin/ feeling that it would be of no/less benefit to someone "forced" to take the course?

Again I would challenge you to take the course and then decide if it benefits bowhunters. Much like your hunting proposals an subjective view must be kept. Does the course benefit the whole because we know we will never please everyone.


----------



## GRIFF (Sep 22, 2007)

By the way prostrate is lying face down. A prostate is the part of the male anatomy that is without a doubt a faulty part and we will all get cancer there if we live long enough. Just thought I'd clear that up.
Later,
Griff


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

mulepacker said:


> Don't skirt my question Define Hyperbole!!!
> 
> Is your opinion based on any factual information or just your opinoin/ feeling that it would be of no/less benefit to someone "forced" to take the course?
> 
> Again I would challenge you to take the course and then decide if it benefits bowhunters. Much like your hunting proposals an subjective view must be kept. Does the course benefit the whole because we know we will never please everyone.


Hyperbole: rhetorical exaggeration in speech.

My opinion is based on human nature and 40+ years on this earth. People, especially grown independent men (archers), tend to get less out of things that are mandated to/on them, whether it be the wife making them go to the ballet/dress shopping, or a course on bow hunter education. I believe giving incentive, and/or bribing folks to attend will result with a much better outcome. I *hate *being told I have to do things, whether be wearing a seatbelt, going to church for my salvation, etc. I may very well take a bow ed class in the near future, but as a 41 year old MAN, it should be MY choice to do so. If I haven't learned ethics, and what constitutes a 'good' shot by now, you or any other instructor is going to have little effect on me if I am FORCED to attend the course.

I think the effect could likely HURT the whole more then benefit the whole. Restricting the number of hunters who 'qualify' to bow hunt when we are trying to get MORE tags/opportunities for bow hunters seems counterproductive to me. Just as seatbelt laws 'benefit' society as a whole, I think it is a bad law/precedent to mandate adults wear them. Where do you/we draw the line on conformance? Seems like a slippery slope that I would rather avoid. Are we going to set an IQ minimum as well? How about some sort of common sense measurement? Maybe send an _ethics_ cop along to ensure EVERY bow hunter complies to the letter of the 'standard'? :?

I do NOT like more restrictions, nor do I like more mandates. I say that as a bow hunter and as a member of the human race. Preach _ethics_, teach _ethics_, promote _ethics_, but do *NOT* force _ethics_!


----------



## Bow Mama (May 1, 2008)

o-||


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

Hey guys, I am back and ready to start hunting. When I do, I am going to try and do the best I can, and I will do all I can not to make any mistakes. But if I do, I sure as tarnations ain't telling anyone on this forum that I made one. 

If I was sitting in a pass, and someone pushed a deer to me and it worked, and the deer came thru, I would try to get my bow drawn undetected, and look for a good shot, if it did not present itself, I would not release my arrow. BUT.......... a lot of times a buck will stop and look cautiously as it crossed over, or look back at what just bumped it and that would be my clue to pump it.

I have seen and been apart of oops on the mountain side, I have hunted with some of the best archers in the state, and I can place an arrow in some very difficult places fairly well, but I agree that every shot should be as ethical as it can be, but I have released my arrow in a situation that I thought was very ethical and wish I could get a few do overs.......... that was a very long sentance. 

I am with Pro on this one, promote ethics, don't police them.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

Run on sentences and a couple extra 'buts' in there have made that sentence a grammar nazi's nightmare. :lol:


----------

