What's up with the lighted nock deal?

[sbhooper]

^^^^^^^^, I have to admit that I don't get the "no scope" and no pelletized powder rules either.... Seems like a lot of very intentional splitting of hairs for certain groups very personal agendas instead of the good of hunting as a whole.

I have to agree with you. I was real mad years ago when NM allowed scopes. I thought that it should be kept as a true primitive-type hunt. I had lots of money wrapped up in primitive rifles. I am not going to hunt primitive just for the sake of doing it, but enjoyed it when it was the option.

I now rarely use my REAL muzzle loaders and instead use a little inline that I bought years ago at Cabelas. It and its scope have accounted for many deer.

You have to look at the big picture and ignore the rest.

 

[BuzzH]

Hoping for sensible replies! I was wrong,

What the deal is with technology is where each individual person chooses to draw the line with technology.

Then theres the point where a majority of hunters draw the line with technology.

I believe that one thing archery hunters arent looking at...is what their future looks like. With advances in technology, more people involved, higher success rates, there will be changes.

When I first started bowhunting in MT success rates were low, as in single digit low. Very few people archery hunted mainly because it took a lot of time to become proficient with your bow, learning how to call elk was tough (most people either had train whistles or mouth called), 40 yards was considered a long shot, etc. etc. etc.

Now, its much different, as a good friend and I were talking about last week...what used to take months, if not years of dedication to be a successful archery elk hunter, can now be done in a month. Bows are much easier to shoot, more people willing to help you tune them, flatter trajectories, elk hunting books, videos, youtube, calling seminars, sportsmens channel...on and on.

All these advances have lead to more archery hunters, more impacts on the resource, higher success rates, better shooting at longer ranges, etc.

I talked with another friend a couple weeks ago, that posts on this site quite often about the lighted knock issue, advances in archery, etc. As he put it, "its getting pretty tough for me to justify long archery seasons anymore".

If a line isnt drawn on technology for the more primitive type weapons, there will be shorter and shorter seasons. The resource just cant handle the higher success rates and influx of hunting pressure.

Now, before you say I'm picking on only archery hunters, I think the same thing is happening with rifles, muzzleloaders etc.

We have all become too effective (guilty as charged), and its impacting the resource.

What we all argue about is just how much technology we are willing to accept in return for less time in the field.

In todays rushed society and land of instant gratification, I think more hunters feel that they want to do everything...anything legally, that they can to have a successful hunt.

Very few see the value in spending time and limiting their effectiveness in favor of spending more time in the field.

No easy answers and we all hunt for our own reasons...also why you get some very "spirited" debate on these topics.

 

[noharleyyet]

Well said Buzz.

 

[sneakem]

Long range guns and bows and muzzleloaders..... what a bunch of pansies... I prefer to use my bare hands..

I agree with Buzz on this one...

 

[Bambistew]

What we all argue about is just how much technology we are willing to accept in return for less time in the field.

In todays rushed society and land of instant gratification, I think more hunters feel that they want to do everything...anything legally, that they can to have a successful hunt.

Very few see the value in spending time and limiting their effectiveness in favor of spending more time in the field.

Well stated. Human nature dictates that we improve on everything we do. It all started when someone sharpened a rock and tied it to a stick.

IMO, hunters in particular, are afraid of failing or not filling a tag. Most can't be satisfied with the "hunt" and are only fulfilled with a trophy in the bag. Many will do what ever it takes to swing the odds in their favor. Be it flat shooting bow/rifle custom this or that, etc. I try to draw the line on some things, but I'm as guilty as anyone. I knew that day I screwed sights on my compound bow I knew I'd caved, or was it the day I got my first spotting scope?

In the end the animal is just as dead if it was shot with an arrow with a lighted knock or with a sniper rifle.

I often think about this in terms of fishing for salmon. We have the commercial guys out in the inlet netting fish by the thousands, with no limit on take, other than in aggregate total pounds. If the fish make it past them, they have to swim around a bunch of 5' diameter nets held by guys like me at the mouth of the river. Those guys are limited to 30 + 10 per household member... then if the fish finally make it through that gauntlet they have to get past the hook and sinker club.. This is where it gets stupid... the fish can only be kept if its caught in the mouth, and the limit is 3 per day... The end of the day the fish is dead and in the freezer no mater how it was killed, but to put limits on how people take the fish is ridiculous. Half the fish you catch on rod/real have hooks buried in them, or gashes from nets, or torn out hooks. Does it really matter if you keep a "snagged" (not caught in the mouth) fish?

I have to say for as much d-bagery that gets tossed around by the traditional crowd, I can understand their point of view. At the same time, they're just into a D measure contest to prove that they can get it done with less instead of more. Just a different type of bragging.

If we were all in it just for the experience, we'd be bird watchers.

 

[JohnCushman]

I prefer to wear a loin cloth and blow darts out of my arse with no lighted nocks to kill animals..Chuck Norris style

 

[sweetnectar]

If hunting was only about killing I'd use an airplane with a machine gun and night vision. To me hunting is a sport and we define the rules to help make the challenge. For example, basketball has rules and standards set. I love the challenge of the hunt. Some of us set our own standards ie. point size bow or gun, uniqueness, etc. To me I feel that lighted knocks don't give me such an advantage as to make things not challenging. However, using an airplane to spot animals, hunting in a high fenced area, or using a spotlight or night vision doesn't seem as cool as JohnCushman using a loin cloth and blow darts Chuck Norris style....minus the arse part

 

[Zach]

I prefer to wear a loin cloth and blow darts out of my arse with no lighted nocks to kill animals..Chuck Norris style

The Pdog hunt is now canceled...

 

[Cornell2012]

who is this friendly neighbor admin I don't think I've heard of in my years of being on here

I haven't been around much for a while. I mostly try to keep threads under control/remove spam/approve new users, and sometimes post a bit of my own.

 

[bigbuckhughes]

Lighted nocks are great. With the speed of todays bows, it is hard to view flight of the arrow. Sight of impact spot is greatly enhanced. Great wonderful invention. Now if only some one would come up with a way to shoot critters that would leave a paint splotch on the hide. Sort of like catch and release for fishing. Just a thought.

 

[Zach]

Funny this should come back up, saw an update on the Lumenok FB page that P&Y will now accept lighted nocks.

 

[Don K]

Just because they became legal doesn't mean you have to use them.

 

[Zach]

Still not legal in CO.

 

[Joe Hulburt]

Not legal in Oregon.

What I find interesting is how due to a barrage of advertisements and product placement so many new bowhunters feel so strongly they need to spend another $10 (I think that is what they cost) per arrow to have success. I've been bowhunting for over 25 years and it's never occurred to me I needed one.

They do have a little gizmo that you attach to your arrow that sticks a radio transmitter into the critter when you shoot them that would be kind of handy. It wouldn't do anything to aid in the shot only help recover game. I want one! I want one! I promise it won't aid me in any way other than to recover dead game. I guess we will see where it all ends.

 

[Montanahunterjon]

I just don't understand how a lighted nock would give a huge advantage? Once the arrow leaves your hand there is nothing you can do about it anyway, it just seems like it would be easier to find your arrow after the shot, but it won't make your aim more true. So is it just too much technology?

 

[BuzzH]

Its not really about the advantage IMO.

Its about what a lighted knock says in regard to marketing, advertising, and how we're willing to set the ideals of the sport aside to sell a product.

There are reasons why States like OR, MT, and CO have said NO and limited lighted sights, arrows, etc.

I dont think many modern archery hunters realize how archery seasons were sold to the various GF agencies. It was pitched as a low success rate, low impact to the resource, with low numbers of hunters.

Its morphed into something much different than that, and its a 100% a function of technology. If states were to pass legislation that limited archery hunters to longbows and recurves, I can assure you that participation in archery only seasons would decline sharply.

Archery hunters have some choices to make with technology, and right now the choices are being made for them by the archery industry. Anything and everything you can hook to a bow to make it easier is pushed and marketed by industry., If you question the industry, you're an instant arsehole if you push back against things like 90% let-off, luminoks, faster bows, lighter arrows. You're an even bigger jerk if you suggest shorter archery seasons or point out the impacts that archery hunting has on bull elk, elk being pushed onto private sooner because of archery season, etc.

Archery hunters need to start accepting that they are impacting themselves with the huge advancements in technology.

Something is going to give...

 

[roadhunter]

Pretty typical responses.

One side wants you to believe lighted knocks are "the devil" and are going to ruin hunting forever. They will tell us how the season dates will change and how it impacts things like success rates. .

Fortunately these things have been legal is many/most sates for quite some time and hunting has not been ruined forever, the season dates have not drastically changed, etc, etc... If lighted knocks were really a major problem we would have had plenty of examples by now as they have been in use for many years in many states.


You could easily make the same argument about things like rangefinders which are an electronic device that can improve success and lead to people taking longer shots. But the invention of the rangefinder has not ruined hunting or changed season dates either.

Some people just don't accept change and prefer to do things the old way. The only sure thing in life is change so we might as well accept that change is going to happen. Honestly I can't imagine all the changes that will take place in the next 5-10-20+ years but I know there will be major changes just like there has been the last 100 years.

The funny part of this whole debate is that many of the people who are against things like lighted knocks have the latest and greatest rifle, scope, cds dial for long range shooting, electric rangefinder, low BC bullets, gps, etc... Basically they have no problem using the latest technology for their style of hunting but dont' want others to do the same for some reason.

 

[Wapiti Warrior]

To me it isn't about advantage or not, it is where we Montana bow hunters, years ago, drew the line in the sand and said no electronic devices on your bow or arrows. We also said you have to hold the bow string under your own power to be legal during bow season. Sure there are some cool gadgets out there but in the end isn't bow hunting about just getting out with a bow in your hand and trying to get close to your game? I think Montana is on the right course and I support these rules.

John

 

[HSi-ESi]

I don't think anyone has said that lighted nock's are "the devil". But to say that the advances in archery technology hasn't made hunting with a bow easier is pure denial.

I got out of bow-hunting during college and early in my career. I wanted to get back in, but didn't have the time to practice regularly. I planned to get back in when my kids were a little older (they are 4 and 1 now). But last year I shot a buddy's bow (new compound). I was amazed. I could easily hit within a 6 inch circle at 60 yards. I hadn't shot a bow in 15 years.

So I'm back in now (shooting 3 times a week). I shot a doe last fall with a bow I had purchased, setup and practiced with for only a month.

Don't get me wrong - I do like some of the technology. But I also understand that there will be some resource changes coming in the future for Montana - at least with some species and seasons. As more people get into the sport (availability of hunting how-to resources, social media and now the 'foodie' movement) - there will be more people in the field and more pressure on animals.

These are choices each state gets to make. I just think it's good to debate on these issues regularly. I'm not against lighted nock's, CDS systems, rangefinders, gps etc. But we don't hunt in a vacuum.

And I still prefer my 40 year old Weaver K4 over any variable scope.

 

[Zach]

Its not really about the advantage IMO.

Its about what a lighted knock says in regard to marketing, advertising, and how we're willing to set the ideals of the sport aside to sell a product.

There are reasons why States like OR, MT, and CO have said NO and limited lighted sights, arrows, etc.

I dont think many modern archery hunters realize how archery seasons were sold to the various GF agencies. It was pitched as a low success rate, low impact to the resource, with low numbers of hunters.

Its morphed into something much different than that, and its a 100% a function of technology. If states were to pass legislation that limited archery hunters to longbows and recurves, I can assure you that participation in archery only seasons would decline sharply.

Archery hunters have some choices to make with technology, and right now the choices are being made for them by the archery industry. Anything and everything you can hook to a bow to make it easier is pushed and marketed by industry., If you question the industry, you're an instant arsehole if you push back against things like 90% let-off, luminoks, faster bows, lighter arrows. You're an even bigger jerk if you suggest shorter archery seasons or point out the impacts that archery hunting has on bull elk, elk being pushed onto private sooner because of archery season, etc.

Archery hunters need to start accepting that they are impacting themselves with the huge advancements in technology.

Something is going to give...

Couldn't the same be said for rifle hunting? Shot distances over 500yds are certainly more common these days thanks to advances in technology. Muzzleloaders? 200 yd shots more common thanks to the advances in inline technology.

If I'm reading the statistics correctly for CO(2013) http://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Hunting/BigGame/Statistics/Elk/2013ElkHarvestSurvey.pdf

Rifle hunters harvested 35k elk and Archery hunters harvested 5600 elk.