# Crossbow Poll: Should Utah Allow Crossbows?



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

I realize we have already had a long discussion on this topic on a different thread (http://utahwildlife.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38544); however, I, and a few other sportsmen, would like to know just how many of you are for or against legalizing crossbows in Utah.

Let us know why you voted the way you did, or if you have any other suggestions that aren't listed in the poll questions.

***OOPS... I edited a question on the poll and it erased the results. My apologies.
The results as of 11/22/11 10:09AM were

(22 votes) Yes - during the archery AND "any-weapon" seasons (and as long as it doesn't affect season dates or tag numbers
(6 votes) Yes - but only during "any-weapon" seasons
(0 votes) Yes - but NOT during the deer or elk seasons, only for bear, cougar, turkey, etc.
(0 votes) Yes - but only during a crossbow specific season (tags would be taken from other hunts)
(7 votes) No - current crossbow laws should stay as they are (permanently disabled hunters only)
(0 votes) No - crossbows should not be allowed for hunting in Utah for any reason whatsoever


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

As is, I would vote no on crossbows. If your poll had a caveat of restricting certain attributes, I may have a different opinion.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

Treehugnhuntr said:



> As is, I would vote no on crossbows. If your poll had a caveat of restricting certain attributes, I may have a different opinion.


What would you add to the poll? I would be happy to add some more options.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

I am a bowhunter and wouldn't use one myself, but I have no problem if someone else wants to use one, even during the archery season, as long as the use of crossbows didn't reduce the number of tags or shorten the season.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

elkfromabove said:


> I am a bowhunter and wouldn't use one myself, but I have no problem if someone else wants to use one, even during the archery season, as long as the use of crossbows didn't reduce the number of tags or shorten the season.


That is a good point. I added that in parenthesis for you.


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

Great poll. I think they are a fantastic addition for Utah residents


----------



## silentstalker (Feb 19, 2008)

Nope. Only for disabled hunters or during the general any weapon seasons. I have shot them. They do not need to be drawn on an animal and can be shot off a tripod. Both major reasons why I am against them. They do not belong in an archery season IMO.


----------



## rdoggsilva (Apr 6, 2011)

I voted no unless for disabled. Those that use a bow put alot of effort and work into it. To me a crossbow is for those to lazy to learn to use a bow.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

Can't answer the question because its too narrow...a single consideration in a much bigger issue. Advances in weapon technology and IT technology have outdated our current regulations and we now need a comprehensive equipment review.


----------



## JERRY (Sep 30, 2007)

A tag is a tag! As long as there are no safety issues I just don't get it. Let people hunt with a spear if they want to.

If it lets more people hunt with a tag (lower success rates equals more tags) let them give it a try. I don't believe it will have an affect on success rates. 

I am open for discussion on this one. I haven't seen a really good reason not to allow them other than you don't have to draw it back. Which baffles me. You get one shot. It is with an arrow. Shot placement may be more ethical/precise(a good thing), but not guaranteed. You all know how shaky you can be with an animal standing within 40 yards. 

Do you think people will be more drawn to this form of hunting so it threatens the way you hunt? I guess I just don't get it.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

silentstalker said:


> Nope. Only for disabled hunters or during the general any weapon seasons. I have shot them. They do not need to be drawn on an animal and can be shot off a tripod. Both major reasons why I am against them. They do not belong in an archery season IMO.


What difference does it make if they don't need to be drawn at the moment of the shot? It only takes a second to draw a compound bow back. Crossbows only shoot one arrow at a time before you have to ****ed it again. You still need to get into bow range.

Maybe range finder shouldn't be allowed because then you would have to guess the distance of your shot. This is the kind of logic your using here.


----------



## kailey29us (May 26, 2011)

I think they should allow them, I personally would not use one until I am unable to draw regular archery equipment. I dont see a problem.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

I think they would be a great addition. They would allow 'newbies' be eased into the bow hunting realm, they would allow for young/old hunters to enjoy the sport, and there is amble data to show that crossbows do NOT lead to higher success rates. The single biggest limiting factor for bow hunting success is distance, and that is still the case when a cross bow is used, in fact I contend the current compound bow is far more accurate, has far more range, and is a far more effective weapon, so if crossbows are deemed to 'modern', or too effective, then so should the majority of late model compound bows. To be clear, I am NOT advocating putting new restrictions on compound bows, I am merely pointing out what should be obvious!


----------



## bowhunt3r4l1f3 (Jan 12, 2011)

I feel that even though it may be a crossbow it is still a bow. What I mean is you still have to be within 100 yards of the animal and still put on a good stalk. I don't think the success rates would really change that much. I also don't feel that guys who have been shooting bows their whole lives will want to switch to a crossbow (I wouldn't). If anything more people might try archery season but I don't feel they would be anymore successful than the other archers.


----------



## gregkdc (May 19, 2008)

I didn't vote only because I didn't see an option I liked; why not allow crossbows during the muzzle loader? They are both single shot, short range (obviously a crossbow has a shorter range than a muzzle loader) and can be aimed from a dead rest, or just have a crossbow only hunt if they can't compete with the muzzle loaders.


----------



## Critter (Mar 20, 2010)

gregkdc said:


> I didn't vote only because I didn't see an option I liked; why not allow crossbows during the muzzle loader? They are both single shot, short range (obviously a crossbow has a shorter range than a muzzle loader) and can be aimed from a dead rest, or just have a crossbow only hunt if they can't compete with the muzzle loaders.


And where would the tags come from? The muzzle loader hunts already get their tags from the general rifle, so should we take more away from the general rifle to give to the crossbow hunters? How about limiting the bow season to just those that shoot a long bow and make those with compounds hunt in the general rifle season?

I believe that it is a bow with a bolt/arrow and belongs in the archery season


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

gregkdc said:


> I didn't vote only because I didn't see an option I liked; why not allow crossbows during the muzzle loader? They are both single shot, short range (obviously a crossbow has a shorter range than a muzzle loader) and can be aimed from a dead rest, or just have a crossbow only hunt if they can't compete with the muzzle loaders.


Why would you want to hunt with a crossbow during a ML hunt in the first place? Wouldn't it be easier on an archery hunt where the crossbow belongs?


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> gregkdc said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't vote only because I didn't see an option I liked; why not allow crossbows during the muzzle loader? They are both single shot, short range (obviously a crossbow has a shorter range than a muzzle loader) and can be aimed from a dead rest, or just have a crossbow only hunt if they can't compete with the muzzle loaders.
> ...


+1


----------



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

I'm with Finn on this one, not enough info. If you argue the lethality and effectiveness of cross guns versus the compound bow to try to thwart the legality of using them during the archery season you're an idiot. Todays C.M.A.S.D's are WAY more effective a killing weapon in the right hands than any crossbow. So, if you argue lethality, the compound bow should be illegal instead... It's a fact, the lethality and effectiveness of todays technology enhanced systems are THE reason archery hunters are taking it in the shorts. Rule makers are seeing them as a bigger reason we don't have the deer we used too. Total baloney, but it's true.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

gregkdc said:


> I didn't vote only because I didn't see an option I liked; why not allow crossbows during the muzzle loader? They are both single shot, short range (obviously a crossbow has a shorter range than a muzzle loader) and can be aimed from a dead rest, or just have a crossbow only hunt if they can't compete with the muzzle loaders.


In Utah, you cannot use standard archery tackle during the ML hunt. That is the reason I didn't list that option.


----------



## MadHunter (Nov 17, 2009)

I see nothing wrong with allowing crossbows during archery or any legal weapon hunts. Saying crossbows are not archery equipment is like saying a Wankel engine (rotary engine) is not an engine. Just because it functions a bit different doesn't make any less of an engine. I think hunters should have the option to decide what kind of archery equipment they use. I also think Muzzy's should be allowed magnification scopes bt that's for a different thread.


----------



## StillAboveGround (Aug 20, 2011)

horsesma said:


> A tag is a tag! As long as there are no safety issues I just don't get it. Let people hunt with a spear if they want to...


Agreed.


----------



## C.elaphus<--- (Oct 19, 2011)

The laws are perfect the way they are. In my opinion at archery is meant to be the challenging hunt for the more skilled and dedicated hunters although from experience recently everyone is all of a sudden an archer. I know some of you say you still have to be close with the crossbow but it's not the same. I've shot crossbows and I know it would be an easier hunt then with a standard bow.


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

I dont believe that crossbows are the monsters in the closet that some think they are.
In Wyoming about 10-15 percent of hunters use them. Some Wyoming hunters use both a crossbow and a verticle bow. Just another choice. Crossbows havent shown to have shown any negative impact with their use.

Back east they have almost 50% of hunters in some areas that use them. A significant portion of these hunters use both a verticle bow and a crossbow.

This weapon doesnt increase shooting distance or the fact that you still have to get close in to shoot.

Its just another option for hunters to choose from.

Andy


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

C.elaphus<--- said:


> ...archery is meant to be the challenging hunt for the more skilled and dedicated hunters...


And fly-fishermen are more dedicated and better than other fishermen... And golfers are more dignified and top-notch than other athletes... That's a little presumptuous isn't it?

So you are saying rifle and ML hunters are basically the bottom-of-the-barrel ******** who don't really care about what it takes to be a good hunter, as long as they "git ta shoot somethin?"

This is the division of hunters that has been brought up way too may times. We all hunt. We all enjoy the outdoors and our method of hunting. Not one weapon choice is better than the other. It's people like you that think you are better than everybody else because you shoot a stick and string that have caused this huge division between sportsmen.

I hunt with a bow and I hunt with a rifle; and I know more rifles hunters that are, as you would say, "more skilled and dedicated" than I do that archery hunt. Who are you to say otherwise?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I don't want crossbows legal. My reasoning is simple (and not based on any evidence): I believe that if crossbows were made legal we would be increasing the number of yahoos out there who decide that since their "bow" can shoot 100 yards it is ok to launch shots at animals from those distances. I believe that bow-hunting is seeing a scary trend right now with all the new advances in technology and we are slowly moving away from what bowhunting is supposed to be about--a primitive hunt that is difficult and requires hunters to close within 50-60 yards in order to ethically and effectively make their kill.

I know that by saying this I am opening up a huge can of worms and many will disagree...so be it. But, I just don't like the idea of more unethical hunters joining the "bow-hunting" fold....and, my opinion, is that it will happen.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> I don't want crossbows legal. My reasoning is simple (and not based on any evidence): I believe that if crossbows were made legal we would be increasing the number of yahoos out there who decide that since their "bow" can shoot 100 yards it is ok to launch shots at animals from those distances. I believe that bow-hunting is seeing a scary trend right now with all the new advances in technology and we are slowly moving away from what bowhunting is supposed to be about--a primitive hunt that is difficult and requires hunters to close within 50-60 yards in order to ethically and effectively make their kill.
> 
> I know that by saying this I am opening up a huge can of worms and many will disagree...so be it. But, I just don't like the idea of more unethical hunters joining the "bow-hunting" fold....and, my opinion, is that it will happen.


Pure BS. How are you going stop unethical archery hunters that shoot a compound bow? There was a video posted on this site about a month ago where an archer shot a two point buck and watched it struggle as it died. They made a mockery of it.

Wyo2ut should be make decisions based on emotion or logic?

I hope that your using a wooden bow and arrows with flint broadheads since you bring up primitive.

BTW shooting a crossbow doesn't automatically make you unethical. It all depends on the person and their choices that they make.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

wyoming2utah said:


> I don't want crossbows legal. My reasoning is simple (and not based on any evidence): I believe that if crossbows were made legal we would be increasing the number of yahoos out there who decide that since their "bow" can shoot 100 yards it is ok to launch shots at animals from those distances. I believe that bow-hunting is seeing a scary trend right now with all the new advances in technology and we are slowly moving away from what bowhunting is supposed to be about--a primitive hunt that is difficult and requires hunters to close within 50-60 yards in order to ethically and effectively make their kill.
> 
> I know that by saying this I am opening up a huge can of worms and many will disagree...so be it. But, I just don't like the idea of more unethical hunters joining the "bow-hunting" fold....and, my opinion, is that it will happen.





> There was no difference in the aggregate wounding rates by bowhunters using compound bows or crossbows
> 
> http://www.marylandqdma.com/files/Downl ... -31-34.pdf





> Crossbows are often cited as having a greater range than bows. Crossbows will provide hunters with an extended range, but the effective range is still limited to approximately 60 yards or less. A skilled bow hunter can shoot effectively out to 50 yards, but most bow hunters limit shots to 30 yards or less.
> 
> http://myfwc.com/media/1381902/2010_Jun ... tation.pdf


----------



## JHas (Nov 21, 2007)

My wife and son hunted with a crossbow for the first time this year and it was nothing short of a pain in the butt. They are heavy, awkward to handle, almost impossible to carry for any distance and very slow to reload. My kid took two <50 yard shots at two different elk and missed both times so they are far from easy to kill with.

I can't see anything wrong with making them legal and I would bet that most of you will quickly return to a compound bow after trying one.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

UtahHuntingDirect said:


> > There was no difference in the aggregate wounding rates by bowhunters using compound bows or crossbows
> >
> > http://www.marylandqdma.com/files/Downl ... -31-34.pdf
> 
> ...


[/quote:wssywq4a]
agreed. The problem, though, is the uneducated public who doesn't know this. Lately, with the new advances in bow technology, a lot of bowhunters are starting to believe that their range goes out to distances over 100 yards...to me this is unethical. Allowing the usage of crossbows, will only grow this contingent of bow hunters in my opinion.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Sep 14, 2007)

The only way I would vote yes is if they cut 5000 tags or more and put them in the archery pool. Im all for shortening the range of the weapons. Even if a crossbow or bow can only shoot a 100 yards. That's 900 closer yards then a hunter has to get with a rifle. I know for a fact I could kill any buck I see with a rifle on any given day its not the case with a long range compound bow set up. Im about as skilled as it gets with a bow and it simply takes way more hunting days to kill a mature buck with a bow. To argue otherwise shows me you argue on emotion instead of facts.

33% 33% 33% is the only way we can still issue more tags/opportunity while still increasing horn size by letting more bucks reach maturity.

To manage exclusively with rifle tags would mean way more years of waiting periods for the same effect. I would rather have the opportunity to hunt then years of waiting. If they make it fair in years of waiting ill toss the bow.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

wyoming2utah said:



> UtahHuntingDirect said:
> 
> 
> > > There was no difference in the aggregate wounding rates by bowhunters using compound bows or crossbows
> ...


I realize what you are saying; however, the wounding rates are indicative of this not happening. If more hunters were out taking shots beyond the effective range of a crossbow because they misunderstood its abilities, then you would see a higher rate of wounding with a crossbow versus conventional tackle. That's all.

Perhaps the idiots that do take 100 yard shots are equal on both sides (crossbow and compound)... Then I guess they would just cancel each other out.


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> UtahHuntingDirect said:
> 
> 
> > > There was no difference in the aggregate wounding rates by bowhunters using compound bows or crossbows
> ...


agreed. The problem, though, is the uneducated public who doesn't know this. Lately, with the new advances in bow technology, a lot of bowhunters are starting to believe that their range goes out to distances over 100 yards...to me this is unethical. Allowing the usage of crossbows, will only grow this contingent of bow hunters in my opinion.[/quote:2xalp2a4]

I'm probably missing something so don't take my post the wrong way. But my thought would be that most of the new "archery hunters who use a crossbow" would be coming from the rifle/muzzy crowd. So you are okay with those "unethical" hunters using a rifle, but not a more restrictive crossbow? I agree that some will make that incorrect assumption and take unethical shots. Would you rather they were taking those unethical shots at 500-1000 yards like they are currently doing? Obviously we don't want either, but those guys you are talking about are going to do that with a bow/rifle/muzzy/etc.

If your hang up is with technology and improvements then you really should be pushing for the archery hunt to be traditional only with no compound bows/etc.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

UtahHuntingDirect said:


> I realize what you are saying; however, the wounding rates are indicative of this not happening. If more hunters were out taking shots beyond the effective range of a crossbow because they misunderstood its abilities, then you would see a higher rate of wounding with a crossbow versus conventional tackle. That's all.
> Ok...I see what you are saying. Do you know of any studies that show the trends in wounding rates? I would think that if the technology is improving, the wounding rates would be lessening. Is that happening? Also, have you seen any studies that have shown the wounding rates before the allowance of crossbows compared to the wounding rates after the allowance?
> Perhaps the idiots that do take 100 yard shots are equal on both sides (crossbow and compound)... Then I guess they would just cancel each other out.  Actually, I think there are significant numbers probably on both sides.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

JuddCT said:


> But my thought would be that most of the new "archery hunters who use a crossbow" would be coming from the rifle/muzzy crowd. So you are okay with those "unethical" hunters using a rifle, but not a more restrictive crossbow?


Actually, I think that a hunter could be very ethical with one weapon, but unethical with another. I think that a rifle hunter, for example, might very well know and understand his limitations very well...but picking up a crossbow might leave him not knowing understanding these limitations. I know the inverse happens to me all the time--a couple years ago, for example, my brother and I were on a cow elk hunt with our rifles. Upon spotting a group of cow elk, we stalked the animals to under 100 yards even though the elk were well within our ethical range when we first spotted them. The only reason we stalked them was because we are bow hunters and the thought didn't cross our mind to shoot earlier because they "were too far away". Only after we had each killed an elk did we realize that we could have shot them much sooner than we did. Also, just this year I shot a small buck on the muzzleloader hunt...it was my first with a muzzleloader. I shot the buck at a distance of 150-180 yards. Looking back, I feel that the shot was probably not a wise one and too far for my capabilities. Luckily, I hit and killed the deer very quickly. The reality, though, is that hunting with this gun emboldened me to shoot at the deer at a distance further than what I should have. I see the same thing happening with crossbows....whether it is a real or simply a conceived notion is certainly debateable. But, as of now, that is my opinion.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

wyoming2utah said:


> JuddCT said:
> 
> 
> > But my thought would be that most of the new "archery hunters who use a crossbow" would be coming from the rifle/muzzy crowd. So you are okay with those "unethical" hunters using a rifle, but not a more restrictive crossbow?
> ...


Again, It has been talked about many times, to get the rifle hunter to pick up a bow. If that is really what archers want, then your reasoning above seems to faulter, does it not?


----------



## C.elaphus<--- (Oct 19, 2011)

UtahHuntingDirect said:


> C.elaphus<--- said:
> 
> 
> > ...archery is meant to be the challenging hunt for the more skilled and dedicated hunters...
> ...


Don't put words in my mouth and question how I've been brought up in hunting. I know the type of archer your talking about that are arrogant and think they're better then everyone else. That's not me. I though we'd be smart enough to understand what I meant, I guess not. Ive hunted with all weapons and it takes a little less skill to shoot an animal at 400 yards versus 40 yards. so settle down.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Huntoholic said:


> Again, It has been talked about many times, to get the rifle hunter to pick up a bow. If that is really what archers want, then your reasoning above seems to faulter, does it not?


I am not sure what you are saying...but, personally, I don't necessarily want the rifle hunter to pick up a bow. That is my issue...a rifle hunter possesses certain skills and attributes that a bow hunter does not and vice versa. When you start putting a bow hunter in rifle hunting situations and a rifle hunter in bow hunting situations, you create certain quandaries for the hunter that he/she is not used to.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

C.elaphus<--- said:


> UtahHuntingDirect said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="C.elaphus<---":3t6bipov]...archery is meant to be the challenging hunt for the more skilled and dedicated hunters...
> ...


Don't put words in my mouth and question how I've been brought up in hunting. I know the type of archer your talking about that are arrogant and think they're better then everyone else. That's not me.


C.elaphus<--- said:


> ...archery is meant to be the challenging hunt for the more skilled and dedicated hunters...


 I though we'd be smart enough to understand what I meant, I guess not. Ive hunted with all weapons and it takes a little less skill to shoot an animal at 400 yards versus 40 yards. so settle down.[/quote:3t6bipov]

Not a single word was put into your mouth, and I didn't even mention your upbringing.

and this...


C.elaphus<--- said:


> it takes a little less skill to shoot an animal at 400 yards versus 40 yards.


I disagree completly


----------



## JuddCT (Sep 7, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Huntoholic said:
> 
> 
> > Again, It has been talked about many times, to get the rifle hunter to pick up a bow. If that is really what archers want, then your reasoning above seems to faulter, does it not?
> ...


I understand your point but I guess I just disagree. I grew up rifle hunting and always got as close as possible to the deer/elk as possible. In fact, every deer/elk I've taken has been within 75 yards (all with a rifle) but I feel very confident shooting out past that to much longer distances. Spot and Stalk is not a concept that only belongs to archery hunters.

My other personal experience is that in my first year of bow hunting this year I was also presented with said 75 yard shots and passed. My rifle skills didn't automatically kick in and I started firing away at because I'm used to shooting good groups at 200 yards at a paper target. Are there people out there that will do that? Yes, but not as many as you think (my opinion).

The current landscape of hunting is changing and so should hunters (part of the reason I picked up the bow over the last 2 years). I think you have to give people the ability to adapt to the changes that are coming and I think a crossbow would help ease the transition.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

wyoming2utah said:


> Do you know of any studies that show the trends in wounding rates? I would think that if the technology is improving, the wounding rates would be lessening. Is that happening? Also, have you seen any studies that have shown the wounding rates before the allowance of crossbows compared to the wounding rates after the allowance?


Haven't found anything on this yet. If I do, I'll let you know.


----------



## Huntoholic (Sep 17, 2008)

wyoming2utah said:


> Huntoholic said:
> 
> 
> > Again, It has been talked about many times, to get the rifle hunter to pick up a bow. If that is really what archers want, then your reasoning above seems to faulter, does it not?
> ...


W2U I was just trying to make sure I understood what you were saying. Its your opinion and desire and I can respect that. But there are some on here that feel that a 33/33/33 split between Archer, ML and rifle is what is needed. But if we are not going to recruit rifle hunters into archery, then I see no reason for a 33/33/33 split.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Interesting thread. Way back in the day that I took hunters ed, I remember talking about cross bows. They were totally illegal in Idaho back then. We asked our instructor about it, and he said it was because cross bows were a poacher's weapon. They were silent and could shoot great distances. I'm not sure that was true or not, but it was his opinion.

Now 30 years later, compound bows have come a very long way. Looking at specs on modern compounds vs. cross bows, the gap in arrow speed, and subsequently distance, has shrunk to where there is no difference. All data I've seen seems to suggest that a compound can put an arrow out just as far, just as fast, as any cross bow. 

I'm a rifle hunter so I'm trying to understand this. It would seem the argument in my terms, would be that a 30-06 should be allowed, but a 308 should not. Both shoot a bullet as far and fast as the other, but one is more "modern"? I get that cross bow bolts are shorter, but so what. A 30 caliber bullet is usually smaller than a 24 or 27 caliber bullet. But any can kill a deer at roughly the same distances. And an ethical hunter is ethical regardless of the weapon, as is the unethical. So why not? I see absolutely no compelling reason NOT to allow a cross bow during an archery hunt. Again, in my world, that would be the same as saying you can shoot a 30-06 but not a 308. And that makes no sense.

I'll shut up now.


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

Gary, you are right in the areas that you are mentioning........ There are two HUGE differences and that is that one has to be drawn with the weight held. Even though it's a let off, it is still weight and if one needs to understand that theory, hold your arms out stretched at shoulder height with NO weight and see how long you can do that. The other is that one has to be drawn while the animal is in close proximity. Many hunters close the distance to the animals but getting the bow drawn while in close is a very big problem. I am not solid on either way but am not a fan of cross bows in general. I realize that it is weird that I love the newest and fastest bow and have gone a long ways from the recurve but cant get over the hump that the crossbow represents.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Just a question here from a guy that has shot a compound bow all of about twice in my life. I did archery hunt back in high school, using a recurve bow. I know it is hard to hold that thing at full draw. Which is why none of us hunted with anything more than about 50-55 pound bows. The first time I shot a compound was an old Bear Whitetail, with 50% let off. Holding that thing at full draw was a snap compared to the recurve. I know in the 25+ years since, compounds have improved. What is the let off at full draw now? I am asking because I really don't know. I know holding a bow steady at full draw is a trick in itself - I don't question that. Just trying to learn more. Is the argument then, that hunter with a cross bow would hold a significant advantage over a hunter with a compound bow? Significant enough to say it is a different sport and demands to be treated separately? Again - I have no dog in this fight - I'm just trying to understand the subtleties.


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

Elk22hunter,

I respect your questions on the differences that you mentioned. Without turning this into a bash or a he said--she said I wanted to respond to them. 

Like you a couple of years ago I was very against crossbows. Two years and two shoulder surgery’s later I have a different opinion. I did a lot of research and found out a lot of the things I'd taken as gosple on crossbows didnt have the basis I thought they did.

I'll respond to your differences in a couple of ways.
First, for the drawing in the presence of game. I think that you could make an argument either way on this. Back east where there are hundreds of thousands of crossbow/archery hunters the typical shot is less than 20 yards. That is about as much in the presence of game as you can get and there is no difference in harvest rates. If the crossbow had as much of a perceived advantage in this type of hunting the numbers would have to reflect it somewhere.
One of the reasons I've heard for this is the way you hold the weapon. Vertical bows are just that vertical. Most things out there in nature are the same. The trees etc. A crossbow is a big horizontal thing. When you move it, it stands out.

Some guys complain that it is already ****ed back---which is true. But there are a couple of offsets with this. With my 85% let off I can hold back for a long time. 
With a Crossbow I am pretty much limited to one shot. They require a lot of movement in the presence of game to reload. I have had many times on deer with my bow, where I have gotten several shots before they blew out (the occasional buck fever has struck me). 

Finally as to holding them in place---The average crossbow weighs about 8 lbs. More when you put your gear and arrows on it. The weight for a crossbow is all at the front. I don’t know about you but I can’t hold one ready to shoot forward for a long period of time without getting the shakes pretty badly. You have to put it up and down just like a bow and to me movement is movement. 

Finally I've been hunting out of blinds a bit lately and I don’t think that there would be any difference for either of them anyway.
Just a few thoughts I had in response to yours.

Andy


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

Gary,
I've shot for a while and love archery. My first compound was an old bear whitetail II bow. I had a lot of fun shooting that thing. I've had quite a few others over the years. I picked up and shot my first crossbow about a year ago. It was a blast to shoot (it was easy on my shoulders too). I've shot bows a lot more than crossbows but to my limited experience there really isnt a lot of difference between the two. I dont feel that I would be any more successful with a crossbow or that it would give me ANY real advantage over my compound. They are both great weapons!!!

Compound Bows have a large range of let offs with a lot falling into the 80-90% category.


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

My main point is that I hadnt looked into crossbows really until my shoulder surgerys. I played a lot of football once upon a time and my joints are paying for it not.

I know that I can work my way into shooting a bow again------But shoulders are finite things. You only have so many shots through them. I'm not to the point of being handicaped enough YET to get a COR but shooting my bow more often will get me there a lot faster.

Right now to shoot a light weight bow still costs me a bunch of ibuprophin. 

I just dont see any real difference between a bow and crossbow.


----------



## deerlove (Oct 20, 2010)

You could rest your crossbow on a rest all day long, bipod, tripod etc. Not quite like holding a draw string back.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

deerlove said:


> You could rest your crossbow on a rest all day long, bipod, tripod etc. Not quite like holding a draw string back.


Just asking the question....but if success rates are really the same why would we care?


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

Critter said:


> And where would the tags come from?


This is something else I've been thinking about.....if you have (name a weapon here) hunters switch to crossbow does it really matter if that pool loses tags as long as the loss in tags was close in number to the hunters that switched over?

What I'm saying is if 500 rifle hunters switch to crossbow if they were legal would it matter if the rifle pool lost 450 tags? I think this is something we could figure out as well through surveys because the likely scenario is that the vast majority of crossbow hunters would be transplants from other weapon types rather than new hunters competing for tags.


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

Deerlove,

I dont think that many guys would hunt with a tripod all day long ( I do it occasionaly with a rifle and it takes a minute to set up). Crossbows are a little unweildy, and from my experience take two hands to carry well. Hiking around with a large ready crossbow and a tripod and then sneaking to within 30-40 yards of a deer would be tough.....just setting up the tripod that close to a deer would be tough. If you can do that you deserve the deer. 
It you are stationary you are probabally in some kind of blind and they'd never see you draw anyway. 

Just a thought--


----------



## shaun larsen (Aug 5, 2011)

crossbows are for sissys........ if you have "special" needs, then im all for the use of a crossbow, but if you are capable of drawing a normal bow, then you dont have any need for a crossbow. man up and shoot a real bow or apply for a gun tag.


----------



## bullsnot (Aug 10, 2010)

shaun larsen said:


> crossbows are for sissys........ if you have "special" needs, then im all for the use of a crossbow, but if you are capable of drawing a normal bow, then you dont have any need for a crossbow. man up and shoot a real bow or apply for a gun tag.


Shaun....nothing personal but that is plain BS. We are all hunters....what type of weapon you choose to use does not make you more of a man, hunter, or woman for that matter. It may in your own mind but not to many others.....BTW I am primarily an archery hunter.


----------



## JHas (Nov 21, 2007)

shaun larsen said:


> crossbows are for sissys........ if you have "special" needs, then im all for the use of a crossbow, but if you are capable of drawing a normal bow, then you dont have any need for a crossbow. man up and shoot a real bow or apply for a gun tag.


Coming from a guy that participates in the extremely difficult sport of shooting coot...


----------



## pheaz (Feb 11, 2011)

JHas said:


> shaun larsen said:
> 
> 
> > crossbows are for sissys........ if you have "special" needs, then im all for the use of a crossbow, but if you are capable of drawing a normal bow, then you dont have any need for a crossbow. man up and shoot a real bow or apply for a gun tag.
> ...


 :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## shaun larsen (Aug 5, 2011)

JHas said:


> shaun larsen said:
> 
> 
> > crossbows are for sissys........ if you have "special" needs, then im all for the use of a crossbow, but if you are capable of drawing a normal bow, then you dont have any need for a crossbow. man up and shoot a real bow or apply for a gun tag.
> ...


yeah it is pretty tough, especially when half of them were killed with a bow.... are you saying there is something wrong with killing coots? o-||

would you like me to include the 217 ducks ive killed so far this season in my count also?

theres no skill involved with a crossbow as far as shooting is concerned. sure you have to be sneaky to get close enough for a shot, but when a bow is involved, thats only half the battle. you have to wait for the animal to be looking away, draw at the right time, center everything up, use the correct pin, make sure everything is perfect, squeeze the trigger and follow through, all the while being excited! its real easy to just put the stock to your shoulder, find him in the crosshairs and squeeze the trigger... its just my opinion.


----------



## Mojo1 (Sep 8, 2007)

Sorry Shaun, but I disagree. Have you ever used a crossbow??? I have, they are a legal archery weapon in many places back down south. I have hunted and killed deer with both a compound and crossbow, as well as a recurve, and I can tell you straight up that the newer models compounds will acccurately outdistance the crossbows every time. A hunter still has to pratice proper shooting form as well as set up a crossbow's sites to hit at differnet distances, range estimation is still just as critical too. in fact most crossbows will not shoot as flat as the newer modern compounds

If you don't think there is any place for a crossbow in archery hunts then you should also be against modern compound bows. With these anti crossbow opinions there should be an awful large run on recurves, glad I got mine! :lol:


----------



## JHas (Nov 21, 2007)

shaun larsen said:


> JHas said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="shaun larsen":7xpbj2js]crossbows are for sissys........ if you have "special" needs, then im all for the use of a crossbow, but if you are capable of drawing a normal bow, then you dont have any need for a crossbow. man up and shoot a real bow or apply for a gun tag.
> ...


yeah it is pretty tough, especially when half of them were killed with a bow.... are you saying there is something wrong with killing coots? o-||

would you like me to include the 217 ducks ive killed so far this season in my count also?

theres no skill involved with a crossbow as far as shooting is concerned. sure you have to be sneaky to get close enough for a shot, but when a bow is involved, thats only half the battle. you have to wait for the animal to be looking away, draw at the right time, center everything up, use the correct pin, make sure everything is perfect, squeeze the trigger and follow through, all the while being excited! its real easy to just put the stock to your shoulder, find him in the crosshairs and squeeze the trigger... its just my opinion.[/quote:7xpbj2js]

Wow I never really considered how difficult bow hunting is or how manly one must have to be to participate. Thanks for the learnin' session. Carry on!

By the way, although I suck at math, I think if you've killed 217 ducks this season you would be averaging about 4.1 ducks per day. You must really love duck in order to not exceed your possession limit... :shock:


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

I am not set as far as a "rule" yet. I have been in Wyoming for the past 3 years where crossbows are treated the same. Maybe it is a mindset but if I hear of someone shooting a deer or elk with a crossbow it changes my mind about it as much as hearing "high fence" does to a photo of a 450 bull. I am just not a fan of them. That is "my" oppinion. I am totally cool with other guys shooting them who have had shoulder surgery. I had rotater surgery 10 years ago. Guys who have surgery can get a note from the doc. It doesn't mean that they are handicaped. I just don't have my mind wrapped around it. Thats all.


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

In Utah you have to be completely unable to pull 40#'s. 40 + at all and its a no go even if it isn't good for your shoulder.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

shaun larsen said:


> theres no skill involved with a crossbow as far as shooting is concerned. sure you have to be sneaky to get close enough for a shot, but when a bow is involved, thats only half the battle. you have to wait for the animal to be looking away, draw at the right time, center everything up, use the correct pin, make sure everything is perfect, squeeze the trigger and follow through, all the while being excited!


Here is everything you have to do when shooting a crossbow:


- Wait for the animal to look away.
- Shoulder the crossbow at the right time.
- Center everything up.
- Use the correct pin.
- Make sure everything is perfect.
- Squeeze the trigger.
- Follow through.

Here's the crazy part, you have to do ALL of this while being excited!

That's weird... this sounds very familiar...


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

My legitimate question to all of the guys who are for crossbow hunting in Utah. "Is there a possibility that you all feel deep down that you will have greater success with a crossbow? I can totally see the guys oppinions who have shoulder problems. There has to be a hidden agenda for the people who just WANT to go to a crossbow.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

elk22hunter said:


> My legitimate question to all of the guys who are for crossbow hunting in Utah. "Is there a possibility that you all feel deep down that you will have greater success with a crossbow? I can totally see the guys oppinions who have shoulder problems. There has to be a hidden agenda for the people who just WANT to go to a crossbow.


That's a great question. For me personally, no. I have had great success using my compound bow. In fact I have taken several nice bull elk over the past few years, and thinking back, a crossbow would not have helped me any more in any of those hunts. My personal "agenda" is just me liking to try new things. However, as I have researched this topic more and more, I really do see a benefit to allowing crossbows. Multiple studies from other states show that crossbows are a great way to bring new hunters to the sport and give older hunters a way to continue doing what they love. It also gives all of us more options in the sport of hunting. They really don't add any advantage to hunting, but they do add variety. There is no real reason why they should be restricted in Utah. That's it (for me anyways).

Will I switch over from my compound and recurve bows completely if crossbows are ever allowed? Absolutely not, but I would like the option to use one.


----------



## JHas (Nov 21, 2007)

elk22hunter said:


> My legitimate question to all of the guys who are for crossbow hunting in Utah. "Is there a possibility that you all feel deep down that you will have greater success with a crossbow? I can totally see the guys oppinions who have shoulder problems. There has to be a hidden agenda for the people who just WANT to go to a crossbow.


I too use a compound and have had good success. My family has tried a crossbow once with zero success. I will probably never use a crossbow but I do not have any problem with someone else doing so.

I feel that my bow skills are adequate enough that I do not need to feel threatened by crossbow hunters.


----------



## elk22hunter (Sep 7, 2007)

I like those answers. I don't ever see me changing to a crossbow but I will try to be a bit more open minded about others using them.


----------



## bwhntr23 (Sep 29, 2008)

I voted to allow them just to try and create opportunity and to allow people to try different things. As has been stated there have been many studies and the facts show that the success rates are very similar to archery equipment.


----------



## rdoggsilva (Apr 6, 2011)

elk22hunter said:


> I like those answers. I don't ever see me changing to a crossbow but I will try to be a bit more open minded about others using them.


I also need to change how I think about this, after reading what was brought to light. I remember when they pushed to allow compounds and the archery hunt and how those of us that used recurves and longbows fought it, for the same reasons, as the crossbow. But I look at it different now. I have two sons that use compounds (I still love them), but I have used a recurve since 1965 and will not change over.


----------



## mikevanwilder (Nov 11, 2008)

I had really no opinion either way here, but after reading this thread and knowing someone who has used a crossbow to take a bull elk and a buck antelope in utah(he has a COR) I really don't see why not let people use them if they want. He said he would rather use a vertical bow but because of his bad shoulders he can't.
I don't think I would use one regularly but it would be fun to try it once or twice. 
And to say that those that use them are less of a hunter or man/woman is a complete joke, I mean really what makes them less of a hunter than a muzzy hunter?, rifle hunter?, compound bow hunter? So your saying that rifle and muzzy hunters aren't really hunters? Because I would think they are slightly easier than hunting with a crossbow.
Anyway this is a very insightful thread. o-||


----------



## silentstalker (Feb 19, 2008)

silentstalker wrote:
Nope. Only for disabled hunters or during the general any weapon seasons. I have shot them. They do not need to be drawn on an animal and can be shot off a tripod. Both major reasons why I am against them. They do not belong in an archery season IMO.

What difference does it make if they don't need to be drawn at the moment of the shot? It only takes a second to draw a compound bow back. Crossbows only shoot one arrow at a time before you have to ****ed it again. You still need to get into bow range.

Maybe range finder shouldn't be allowed because then you would have to guess the distance of your shot. This is the kind of logic your using here.

You obviously don't hunt with a bow. To get drawn on an animal is the most difficult part of Bowhunting. A crossbow can be set on a tri pod and shot with incredible accuracy. One has *no* movement to execute a shot.

The question I have for each of you is this. If their is no advantage to having the crossgun in the archery season, Why the big push and passion for including it?

The people that I know personally that want this right now is not "for the kids" that can't pull 40# or for the option to hunt with another type weapon. It is 100% for the reason that they know they could have killed animals in the past and will kill animals in the future as a result of shooting a crossgun off their tripods and in a prone position. 

Also, Where are you proposing the permits to come from? The archery hunt already sells out. Not that it matters what I think, but if this were to pass I would hope that permits would be taken from the rifle and muzzleloader hunts to accomidate the switch over of hunters that would be sure to happen.

I know I am in the minority here but my vote is still no.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

silentstalker said:


> silentstalker wrote:
> Nope. Only for disabled hunters or during the general any weapon seasons. I have shot them. They do not need to be drawn on an animal and can be shot off a tripod. Both major reasons why I am against them. They do not belong in an archery season IMO.
> 
> What difference does it make if they don't need to be drawn at the moment of the shot? It only takes a second to draw a compound bow back. Crossbows only shoot one arrow at a time before you have to ****ed it again. You still need to get into bow range.
> ...


----------



## silentstalker (Feb 19, 2008)

So a weapon with a stock/forearm, and trigger mounted directly to it is not a gun? Hmmm. Pretty sure I am not the ignorant one here. It is a cross between a gun and a bow. Not really an argument there, just facts. I don't think you want to compare Bowhunting knowledge with me. I am the smartest guy on the planet, just ask me. lol.

Sooo, the answer to my question is you want crossguns in the bowhunt for people who don't practice and just want to hunt?

Does that not mean they are easier to shoot more accurately since you said "It would also allow people to hunt during the archery hunt who do not have as much time to practice with a compound bow."

Seems to me you are contradicting your previous statements. The crossgun is in fact easier to shoot accurately at greater distances. So what is the real reason you want them?

Where do you want permits to come from?


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

You can call it whatever you want, but it's still considered archery equipment. It also belongs during an archery hunt. Crossbows have the same success rate as a compound bow. It's true they are easier to shoot and you don't need as much practice, but even though they are easier to shoot the success rate doesn't reflect that. I also believe compounds shoot farther because they have more kinetic energy because the bolt isn't pulled back as far as an arrow. The bolt looses a lot of energy. 

You were also against the drawloc the first time it was presented. What made you change your mind?

The reason I'm in favor of the crossbow is because it creates more opportunity for people to hunt during the archery hunt. It has a lower success rate than the rifle hunt. I believe rifle hunters would be more in favor of giving more archery tags to archers if crossbows were allowed.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

You can even google "crossgun" and you won't get as many hits as "crossbow." Like I said your ignorant because you don't even want to call it what is really is........


----------



## wileywapati (Sep 9, 2007)

B.S. Yote if they were considered archery equipment
They would be legal. They are not archery equipment and
They **** sure aren't bows


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

wileywapati said:


> B.S. Yote if they were considered archery equipment
> They would be legal. They are not archery equipment and
> They **** sure aren't bows


Wiley they are considered archery equipment because people get CORs to use them during an archery hunt otherwise they couldn't. They aren't legal unless you qualify because I don't believe a proposal has been made to make them legal for everyone.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Gordy, you and silentstalker get so wrapped up in the technical terms that you forget common sense. Let me guess you don't think a bolt and an arrow are the same thing either?


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

Happy Thanksgiving........and you know I cant let the crossgun statement stand. 
For those who keep reffering to it as a crossgun, you should know better. You're spouting anti crossbow propoganda and you know it. Be honest and say you dont like it and you dont want it included.
Crossbows have been around almost as long as stick bows.......and a heck of a lot longer than compounds. They were here way before guns were ever thought of. Stocks and trigers have been around for thousands of years before guns. Saying a crossbow is a gun would be like me taping wings to your back and calling you a bird. 

Its simple name calling to odemonize a weapon you dont like.

Crossbow not = to a gun


----------



## adamsoa (Oct 29, 2007)

I dont think some of us will ever agree on crossbows.......and I do think they are archery equipment. I have bow.....which is definately archery equipment. If I were to put on a draw lock it would still be archery equipment. I would only have assistance holding it back. If I mounted it to a stock it wouldnt cease being a bow or using the same principles to fire.

If I used the bow vertically and use a release with a TRIGGER aiding in a smoother more accurate release its still archery equipment. So are my slider sights, kisser, string stop, string loop, 80%-90%+letoff.

some hunters are all about putting every advantage and assist on their bow as long as they can say when.

There's still no difference for the arrow in flight. They have the same restrictions.


----------



## silentstalker (Feb 19, 2008)

Happy Thanksgiving to you guy's too! I am stuck at work and got sucked in to this again!!

Adamsoa said,

Be honest and say you dont like it and you dont want it included.

I have already been honest about this. I don't like them in the Bow hunt. I have never changed my beliefs or feelings about them. They are not a bow and they are not a gun. I can agree to that. It is time for you to be honest and admit that you could be more successful due to the lack of effort it takes to shoot a crossbow compared to a bow. I am not hiding any hidden agenda. I simply don't like them.

Yote said,

You were also against the drawloc the first time it was presented. What made you change your mind?

This is not true at all. I am and always have been in favor of the draw loc for the disabled. I think you are thinking of another guy who was sitting by me. The truth of the matter is that proposal failed because it did not go through the RAC process. I am NOT in favor of the draw loc for anyone else for the same reason. If one does not need to draw a bow it significantly increases your ablility to harvest an animal when the moment of truth arrives, For those who do not beleive this, IMO you have not bowhunted very long or have your head in the sand.

The reason I'm in favor of the crossbow is because it creates more opportunity for people to hunt during the archery hunt. It has a lower success rate than the rifle hunt. I believe rifle hunters would be more in favor of giving more archery tags to archers if crossbows were allowed.

Thank you for answering my question. I too am in favor of increasing permit numbers for low harvest weapons. If this were to happen I would consider adding them to the season because it would HELP THE HERD. NOT because they are the same weapon. Where I disagree is the part where you said the rifle hunters would be willing to give up permits for it. Having been involved in the RAC's a time or two I know that this state is so pro RIFLE it can't look at the reality of the hunts. Get the permits lined up and then I will help ya with the crossgun stuff. lol.


----------



## Moostickles (Mar 11, 2010)

wileywapati said:


> They **** sure aren't bows


*Bing's definition of a crossbow* - a powerful weapon that fires bolts: a medieval weapon, or its modern sports successor, consisting of a bow attached crosswise to a stock with a cranking mechanism and a trigger. A crossbow fires short heavy arrows called bolts or quarrels.

*Google's definition of a crossbow* - A bow that is fixed across a wooden support and has a groove for the bolt and a mechanism for drawing and releasing the string.

*Merrium-Webster's definition of a crossbow* - a weapon for shooting quarrels and stones that consists chiefly of a short bow mounted crosswise near the end of a stock.

Sounds like a bow to me...


----------

