87 yards... that may be pushing your luck from that easy chair on the porch..


I hear ya buff... i'm looking but want to wait on the scope issue to..  

--Last edited by Dr Trout on 2009-02-18 17:28:01 --

Quote :

Dr Trout wrote I hear ya buff... i'm looking but want to wait on the scope issue to..

I would wait to.

Quote :

Dr Trout wrote money ??? HB2653 ??? to prove a point ??? they don't like the UBP ??? a hidden adgenda ?? wanted to PO archers in general ??? what say you ??????????

Money: maybe, in new recruitment and retention

HB: I believe this bill put a little spirit in the BOC really exploring the issue further
 
To prove a point: No

Didn't like the UBP: No, but I do know that several comissioners have lost some respect for the organization through this process

Hidden agenda: No

PO archers: No

Another point to consider that I talked to one comissioner at length about was the current study going on in the 4 WMU's.  If these studies show that a one week season does in fact reduce the antlerless kill and hunters liked the structure, it could potentially offset any increased antlerless kill from crossbow inclusion.  No need to change allocations or reduce them as some have feared.

It might not be a coicidence that this study period and the crossbow sunset ammendment expire concurrently.

HB2653 played a LARGE part from what I hear on the inside.....

no one wanted the legislators making this decision... it's interesting that some legislators say the feed back they were getting is the opposite of what the UBP, BOC,  and other are saying.. some of them found many in support of crossbows and they wanted to present them if the PGC was not going to listen to them..????

I have to remind myself not everyone is on the internet or contacting UBP, BOC, or are all archers members of the UBP or any other sportsman's organization... and may well have wanted crossbow inclusion and used the senators and represenatives instead of BOC. ?????

IRONHORSE

IRONHORSE said:
OBSERVER, where do I start.. Well lets just say if by chance you CANT shoot a compound bow then you infact did qualify for a crossbow permit. Read the requirements for a crossbow permit and you will find that it reads "You are not physical capable to draw a bow" so if for some medical reason you in fact cant draw a bow then you are/were elligible, So please have your facts.

Observer says:
Oh I have my facts and I said nothing about not being able to shoot a compound, I said nothing about not being physically capable to draw a bow nor did I say anything about having a medical reason. What I said was “You see some of us didn’t qualify for an xbow permits yet we couldn’t consistently put an arrow in a 2 or 3 inch circle at 30 yards regardless of how much practice we did”.

IRONHORSE said:
But I understand, its easier to take the easy road, after all its the new American way.. And at whos expense? The PA whitetailed deer herd thats whos expense... and dont worry, for you and all of those who think the crossbow is so much more capable of killing without the art of being a true archer, the true archers of the state (like me) will clean up your mess'es as best as possible. When your 12 point runs by me with an arrow stuck in its gut... I"LL BE SURE TO KILL IT!!! if your not physically able to be in the woods archery hunting, notice I said archery hunting not crossbow shooting. Then do the sport a favor and dont go. I believe its your/our responsibility as hunters to give every animal thats considered game a fair chance. You see, I truely do love this sport and it is for that reason that when the day comes I am no longer by my definition a skilled archer..

Observer says:
You see I have respect for the deer also and chose not to archery hunt because I couldn’t consistently hit a 3 inch circle at 30 yards anymore and that was my choice.
Skills or skilled archer - I don’t see where there is a difference in what it takes to get within 30 yards of a deer regardless of the archery weapon of choice. If you are within 30 yards and can take an ethical shot with appropriate shot placement what else do you want me to do to be a true archer?  Where did I not give the game a fair chance?

IRONHORSE said:
I'LL QUIT out of respect fot the sport that has given me years of enjoyment.

Observer says:
You are to be commended on your decision to quit archery hunting when you are no longer a skilled archer (your terms) your decision. However, if you choose to quit when there are other options that is certainly your right.

IRONHORSE said:
Its people who assume they dont have to be good at this and take responsibilty for there own actions that give the liberals of this world all the ammo they need to attack hunting in general... Consider golf, its fun to  

Observer says:
Now where did I not take responsibility as an archery hunter? What makes someone good at archery?  So owning and using a xbow predispositions me to not being good at this and not taking responsibility for my actions, well that is reassuring to know.  What actions did I take to give more ammo to the liberals?

What about golf – nah not for me.

Quote :

Dr Trout wrote : Here's a crossbow topic  I like to see opinions on and we can discuss without dealing with the type of user... Just why do you think the BOC okayed the crossbow with full inclusion... money ??? HB2653 ??? to prove a point ??? they don't like the UBP ??? a hidden adgenda ?? wanted to PO archers in general ??? what say you ??????????

Though some traditional archery hunters are disgruntled about the full inclusion of the crossbow I don’t believe there was anything sinister in the reason for the Board of Commissioners voting the way it went.

First of all if anyone wanted to be angry with anyone about crossbows it should be the State Legislature they should be angry with. Here is the reason I say that and lay this at their feet. At one time the only people who could get a crossbow permit were people with a permanent injury that would prevent them drawing a bow. That was good because it allowed everyone interested in hunting during the archery season that opportunity, either with a conventional bow of a crossbow. All the had to do to qualify was get a doctor to fill out the required paper work, submit it to the WCO and withstand the WCO investigation as to whether they really qualified.

I investigated a number of them, just as every other WCO did, and most did qualify but some simply didn’t. One guy that had the filled out application and doctor forms was a young guy that could still swing a baseball bat hard enough to hit home runs, slide into bases and through a baseball from the outfield back into the infield. He played baseball all summer but come fall he wanted to hunt with a crossbow. That was just one the several that didn’t qualify but all had similar conflicting investigations that disqualified them and we didn’t approve their permit because of the way the law was worded.

Of course people didn’t like it when the WCO and ultimately Harrisburg denied their permit request so they went to the State Legislature and whined until the Legislature changed one word in the law. The one word, simple as it was, changed everything. That one word charge was the word, “May” issue to the word “Shall” issue. With that simple one word change it took all crossbow permit qualification investigations and threw them right out the window. From that point on anyone who wanted to hunt with a crossbow had to do nothing more then go to their Doctor, tell them they had pain in their shoulder or that their shoulder was too weak to draw their bow, have the doctor sign his name, pay the bill for the Doctor’s visit and they were all set to get their crossbow permit.

After that one word change the number of crossbow permits soared to about 63,000 permits being issued in the state. That is somewhere between 20 and 24% of the people that purchase an archery license today. When I say between it is only because we presently don’t know exactly how many of the junior and senior combination license are actually used for archery hunting. Nor, do we know how many of those 63,000 lifetime crossbow permits are still active, a few of them might have died or quit hunting but we have no way of tracking that until the point of sale license in in full affect.

With over 20% of the archery hunters already legal to use a crossbow, and that number growing each year, it was already a matter the Game Commission had no control over. Then couple that with the fact that any archer hunting one of the special regulations areas of the state could already use a crossbow during any legal archery season it was pretty clear that crossbows were only a matter of time for virtually anyone that wanted to use one anyway.

Now for the other thing that I think everyone needs to think about.

The first and foremost responsibility of the Board of Commissioners is to set seasons, bag limits and regulations that take into consideration the best benefits of the resources to do their best to prevent over harvests and under harvests of our wildlife resources. Hunting is the tool, through both policy and legislative mandate, used to meet that objective.

The second objective and mission of the Board of Commissioners to provide the maximum amount of opportunity for hunters and trappers to pursue that wildlife without adversely affecting that resource contrary to that first objective and responsibility to the resource.

Does the full inclusion of the crossbow fit into those two objectives? If it does then the Commission has fulfilled their function and duties. From that point on it then becomes the responsibility of the hunter to make personal choices as to what seasons and tools they want to be a part of.

Dick Bodenhorn    

excellent reply and some insight into the crossbow debate..


see what type discussions can come from keeping it above board ???

thanks Dick....  

--Last edited by Dr Trout on 2009-02-18 22:02:25 --

RSB's post reminds me of one thing .. the last thing we as hunters need or want is more politics in the hunting and fishing world... especially in the decision part of it...

I remember a BATTLE we had at the sportsmans' club over electing folks to the BOC...

what a diaster that would be...

Harrisburg already has too many elected officals that truthfully could care less about the PGC, deer, wildlife, hunting, and fishing.

I listed $$$ as the #1 because that is the reason I hear the most.... HB2653 was #2 because that is the one I think had the most weight...  the BOC KNEW it was coming and wanted to make the call themselves...

If it were all about $$$ they could have auctioned off three or four elk... JUST KIDDIN !!!!!



With maybe only 10% of the population being sportmen can you even begin to imagine who could be elected ???  

--Last edited by Dr Trout on 2009-02-18 22:24:29 --

Quote :

Dr Trout wrote :.... HB2653 was #2 because that is the one I think had the most weight...  the BOC KNEW it was coming and wanted to make the call themselves...

I tend to agree.  It was obvious to those that follow hunting in Pa. that crossbows were coming at some point in time.  With the house bill it was time for the PGC to look at the issue in more depth and see where it lead.  

It was a 6 month process from when Schleiden asked the PGC explore the issue, tentative approval granted then ultimately final approval.  During that time the BOC did their research, listened to what the sportsman and the biologists had to say and weighed all of the factors including budgets and social issues.

Crossbows have been legal for a significant amount of time in the SRA where there is a high concentration of archers residing and hunting plus, as dick pointed out, 63,000 permits out there already.  


A decision was made and it is time to move forward. The magnified optics issue will be ammended in some way then it will be time for the archers and new recruits to decide what to do with the opportunity come this fall.

I will be extrememly important for all parties to monitor the impact, recruitment and rentention over the next  years.  At the close of the sunset ammendment I trust that the PGC will have good data for all to see and we can finally put the issue to rest.

Personally I would interested in the harvest report cards from crossbow users and the dates of harvest.

I like this part...

Quote :

Personally I would interested in the harvest report cards from crossbow users and the dates of harvest.

In fact it brings up a sort of pet peeve of mine....

I wish the PGC would take the time to really show what the results are from the report cards so everyone could see....

not just use them for the number of deer killed and by what type weapon....

they could show times
areas of the WMUs with the bigger harvests
actual numbers for the various days deer were harvested and just how many..

with more info put out there from the cards maybe it would tempt more to send them in ????

But of course why someone would not send them in is a subject for another time...

Quote :

Dr Trout I wish the PGC would take the time to really show what the results are from the report cards so everyone could see....

I agree and there is a wealth of information contained on them.  Date, time, township, weapon etc...

I would be pretty interesting to see the breakdowns.  I will be especially interested with crossbow inclusion, where the harvest are happening and when.

No offense taken Doc, like I said before, I'm always up for a good debate and I like to hear others opinions and factual input. And you never have to worry about me bringing other input from other sites to this one as it is the only one of its kind that I visit. One point that I made and again, im curious to hear others input, is archery season to long? Archery season is by far and away my favorite hunting season and I hate to admit it but I have always believed it was to long. I think with additional hunters in the woods with crossbows it becomes even more of an issue.  I can honestly say that 95% of the time when friends of mine or I have taken an entire week to hunt and hunt hard during a week of archery season, we could have killed at least one leagal buck. Some say well I dont have a week, well again its about how bad do you want it.. Do you take your weeks vacation from work to go to disney with your family or do you spend it in the woods hunting a big buck?  With that said I would really like to see archery season shortened. I think your die hard archers would still get buck, your still gonna get the increased revenue from the archery stamps from the new crossbow hunters, your gonna get more dominate bucks reproducing as opposed to bucks that were "passed up", and your going to have more success in rifle season which lets face it... the rifle hunters are the primary source of revenue from licence sales. JMO

As far as the report card process, i dont want to say its a joke but its not very effective.. Im a huge fan of what Ohio does. You take your deer or turkey to the nearest check station to be perminately taged. Some people think thats to labor intesive and costly for the PGC, wrong.. the check stations are gas stations, pizza shops, i took my buck to an ace hardware store!! It does acomplishes a few things, it makes a much more acurate means of collecting data, it helps with a poching problem that exists in PA that is seldom discussed by politicians or PGC officials because they cant afford to fix it, and the business that are official check stations fight for the right to be one because while your there you buy a drink, get a pizza, etc. It makes tons of sense and as a person who hunts in several other states, outsiders wonder why we dont do it either..  

Dr Trout wrote

money ???
HB2653 ???
to prove a point ???
they don't like the UBP ???
a hidden adgenda ??
wanted to PO archers in general ???

In general I don’t have a strong opinion as to how the BOC arrived at the xbow decision. I do think they should be required to document and publish how they arrived at the decision and not just words (charts, graphs, tables etc).

For example:
Number of Phone calls yes/no
Number of Emails yes/no
Number of preprinted mailed postcards yes/no
Number of Letters yes/no
Number of Sportsmen Organizations/Clubs yes/no
Number of politicians who contacted the BOC and yes/no
Number of Manufacturers who contacted BOC yes/no
Number of PGC/DCNR/BOF contacts yes/no
Number of insurance companies yes/no

Other influential factors

Apply a weight to all categories assuming they are not of equal value.

This would allow those interested to see what drove the decision instead of hearsay. I also realize this is hindsight as I am sure that a significant portion of the information is no longer available, but, could be applied for future issues/decisions.

I can tell you one thing I know first hand....

Some of the comissioners that I have spoken to over the past few years all agreed on one thing.....

The number of complaints about something almost always out weighs the positive comments.

It appears those in favor or supporting an action are the ones that do not take the time to write, call, or visit...

For example... I was traveling with the PGC liason officer, Commissioner Palone and the PGC directors' secretary on a bear tagging trip a couple years ago and I brought up the subject about people contacting them supporting or opposing the deer plan....  they said it was about 10 to 1 against...

But that's when they said it is almost always that way.

I heard the same thing recently about this crossbow debate...

It's a shame that folks do not write, call, or visit and express their opinions...

I guess it's easier to sit back and complain if it does turn out the way one wanted... or just not care one way or the other...

We even had several folks that chose to not vote on the resolutions last night..

and probably will complain that "they" never listen to us anyhow...

Don't be afraid to wrtie, call or visit...

let folks (that are going to make the decision) know how you feel

Thinking that discussions on internet sites hold any weight in decision making is just NOT CORRECT..

While I know some making decisions visit here.. what they read plays a very very small role in their decision making.

I was also told that when writing just do not complain or support.. use some examples.. facts, attached articles that show your position.. avoid these  type things

people I know...
my friends..
the guys I hunt with..
the guys at work..
the guys at the local bar...
I heard that..
I read that... attach what you read....

you can certainly report personal experiences , personal opinions,


BUT BY FAR ----

be courteous,,, show respect in your contact..
and be certain to tell them you would apprciate hearing from them and thank them for taking the time to read.. or listen...  

--Last edited by Dr Trout on 2009-02-19 13:12:52 --

Are you saying that the number was 10 to 1 against both the deer plan and inclusion of crossbows but somehow in both cases that was turned around to being just a small vocal minority against both? That's an interesting concept.

No that is not what I said...

I am saying that that is what the E-mails etc averaged...

after throwing out the ignorate ones... the ones that went off topic and bashed the PGC, another commissioners etc... thrown out

the ones that talked about the things I mentioned to avoid...

and the ones containing BS with no facts or documentation...thrown out..

By thrown out I mean they carried little to NO weight...

so out of ten may 3 or 4 made sense had a good presentation of the writers opinion and they were weighed against the 1 or 2 such supporting contacts...


I would GUESS that E-mails from individual hunters.. phone calls and visits play about a 20-30% role in decision making...

Signed certified petitions carry alot more weight than indivual contacts.....  so if that one supporting letter has 500 signature on it those other 10 non-supporting just lost the lead....

and the #1 thing to remember..  that has been repeated over and over and the "disgruntled" just ignore time and time again is ----




the BOC and the PGC is NOT in the business of making hunters happy.. and making their decision on if it will make hunters happy or angry...


NOT with deer or not about allowing crossbows....

It's about the resource, habitat and allowing the opportunity for hunters to enjoy the sport.

I have the mission of the PGC as a "sticky" and you can read it there... it says nothing about making or keeping hunters happy.... and it says nothing about that deer are their #1 concern..

the mention of hunting has to do with providing a huntable population of wildlife species... NOT pleasing all the hunters all the time........


and as for this one..

Quote :

turned around to being just a small vocal minority against both?

you'll have to show me where someone said that... I just posted what a few told me they were receiving...  where do you get the small vocal minority ????

They just do not base their decisions on the E-mails, letters, petitions, phone calls, and visits from hunters.. I would GUESS for every couple hunters they hear from just as many others  (biologist, sciencists, lobbiest, salesman, business owners, politicians,etc etc etc)...  and it all goes into a pot and the decisions are made based on the whole rather than any  one part....and keeping the goals and mission of the PGC in the fore-front of their decision making.....  

--Last edited by Dr Trout on 2009-02-19 13:48:14 --

Here is part of an E-mail I received from the PGC in Harrisburg today about the decision.... and I thank them for the reply...

Quote :

The easiest response is sometimes the Commissioners do what they feel is “right” even if its not popular or easy.   Remember the same folks fought compounds and mechanical releases and the sky didn’t fall. Public testimony was 3.5 to 1 against but 99.9% or our hunters expressed no opinion.

 

--Last edited by Dr Trout on 2009-02-19 16:05:42 --

The comissioners are smart people and they did not get these positions easily.  

I would imagine that some of their decisions are based off their feelings or opinions on the issue at hand.  But, they must also weigh many factors.  How they weigh all the factors we will never know as it is a personal decision.