Bow hunter will get no sympathy from me ...

[dogtag]

I have no time for bow hunters as mostly their quarry
is wounded and runs off. Hunting with bow and arrow
was fine before firearms were invented but now it's just
Rambo wannabes who do it. Buy yourself a rifle.

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-bear-attack-20180828-story.html

[Roadkingtrax]

There are irresponsible hunters no matter the method used.

winston_churchill_two_finger.jpg

[bruce]

In the last 39 years I have seen a lot of dead deer. Most were shot with firearms... some of which were rifles, some were shotguns and some were handguns. The rest were killed with arrows. Those hit well died promptly. Those hit poorly died slowly. It was exactly the same for those hit poorly with firearms. Last two wounded deer I helped track were shot with rifles ... .270 Winchester to be specific. Distance was no more than 100 yds. Should have dumped those deer with one shot each. Instead, one was hit in the stomach and the other was hit in the rear end. Looks us all about 3 hours to find those deer. One was found dead. The other one, hit in the rear end, was still alive. He was trying to drag himself along with his front legs. It was a mess. Doubt it would have been worse if he'd been hit with a poorly aimed arrow. A well aimed .30-30 would have killed either of those deer. Same with a well aimed arrow. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.

[JB White]

In this case the bear did die from the arrow. The hunter's mistake was approaching his "kill" before it was killed. If rushing a deer it too will get up and run for cover leaving a difficult track
DT, you gave me the impression you are not familiar with the nuances of bow hunting or how an arrow kills vs the hydrostatic shock a bullet imparts on the nervous system etc.

Just last night I heard someone exclaim the fantastic pitching duel between DeGrom (Mets) and Hamels (Cubs) was boring because there weren't any home runs and no real scoring. What they announced is they have no clue in regard to the science of the game.

[Clark Howard]

There are hunters and shooters. Both groups use archery equipment and firearms, as their tastes require. Most are to be found in both categories, hunting or shooting as the circumstances require. Those who hunt with firearms often fire their weapons during a hunt, whether they aim at their quarry, or simply want to shoot their weapon. Bow hunters do the same, but usually take care to loose their arrow in a manner that will allow recovery. Some years ago, I stopped allowing hunting on my farm except for bow hunting. I became tired of listening to an evening fusillade, to find that the hunter had not seen a deer. It is also disheartening to find a tree, fence post, or other fixture destroyed by gunfire. Deer are not scarce in my area, but I find bow hunters to be more successful, more considerate, and less obtrusive than hunters with firearms. That being said, I have found probably 10 times as many deer wounded and dead from arrow wounds than bullet wounds over the years. Regards, Clark

[Allen]

Same with a well aimed arrow.

Unless you had a one in a million shot at point blank range is there really any such thing as a well aimed arrow? I've watched many people shoot arrows with the strongest of compound bows only to see the arrow arch and lose speed at 25yd targets or closer. I seriously doubt that w/o the razor sharp hunting points that the arrow would even penetrate the hide of most animals.

One day I could see them used for home defense ONLY if guns are outlawed and people are stupid enough to give them up. You WOULD be shooting at a point blank range and the razor sharp head would be effective even if the intruder was wearing a Kevlar vest.

Not meaning to step on toes because many people are bow hunters, I once had an interest in them too (but not for hunting), in some states the hunting season is extended for bow hunters and they don't make hardly a sound, but why use them when we have such a variety of guns that are so much more accurate and effective? If it is because of the "sport" of it all hunting these days are for the sport. No one has to hunt for survival.
I mean where do you draw the line. You could technically kill with a blow gun, rock, slingshot or BB gun if you could hit an animal in the eyeball at a close enough range. Could you see us still fighting wars using bows and arrows, swords and clubs?

[Vern Humphrey]

Unless you had a one in a million shot at point blank range is there really any such thing as a well aimed arrow? I've watched many people shoot arrows with the strongest of compound bows only to see the arrow arch and lose speed at 25yd targets or closer. I seriously doubt that w/o the razor sharp hunting points that the arrow would even penetrate the hide of most animals.

Interesting you should say that -- I ran across an arrow in a tree in Colorado, and couldn't pull it out with all my strength. I estimate it penetrated at least four inches of spruce.

[Allen]

Interesting you should say that -- I ran across an arrow in a tree in Colorado, and couldn't pull it out with all my strength. I estimate it penetrated at least four inches of spruce.

While I stand to be corrected. That arrow was no doubt shot at close range and yes the heads are hard to pull out backwards regardless of penetration. My comments are based upon my observations and opinions. Many people bow hunt and to each their own. I remember back in the 80's and 90's, the local pawn shops used to have 2 or 3 dozen used compound bows hanging for sale at all times. I guess a lot of people tried them and didn't like it or went to something else. I don't see them used for sale at all anymore except maybe on sites like Craigslist, but I don't look for them either. In my shooting arrow days I know the wind affects them a lot and as far as hitting an animal in a vital spot verses a non-vital spot it couldn't have happened. I would be lucky to just hit the target. All my .02 worth though.

[clintonhater]

One simple answer to drastically reduce needless suffering caused by idiots with guns (unworthy of the name of "hunter") & promote good sportsmanship, which has been mandated by law for many decades in Europe (where, because of the skill & good conduct of most hunters, there is much less anti-hunting sentiment than in this country): proof of proficiency not only in marksmanship, but in knowledge of the game, & everything else relevant to good sportsmanship.

NEVER possible here, where every state game & fish dept. is supported by license sales & is constantly dreaming up new special tags & permits to sell.

[pcox]

"is there any such thing as a well aimed arrow?"

I've bow hunted for many years with a 50 pound re-curve bow. I start shooting in July to prepare for hunting season, and by opening day I can put six out of six arrows in an apple sized circle every time at twenty yards. I'm not as good as a lot of shooters. Olympic re-curve shooters can do the same at seventy meters. Of course, they are using sights. I shoot instinctively, just look at the point of aim and maintain good form, the arrow hits where you are looking. There's the rub, maintaining good form and executing a good shot is difficult under hunting conditions. Ethical hunters know when to pass on a shot that dose not have a high percentage of success, and just call it a good day in the woods.

[Vern Humphrey]

While I stand to be corrected. That arrow was no doubt shot at close range and yes the heads are hard to pull out backwards regardless of penetration. My comments are based upon my observations and opinions. Many people bow hunt and to each their own. I remember back in the 80's and 90's, the local pawn shops used to have 2 or 3 dozen used compound bows hanging for sale at all times. I guess a lot of people tried them and didn't like it or went to something else. I don't see them used for sale at all anymore except maybe on sites like Craigslist, but I don't look for them either. In my shooting arrow days I know the wind affects them a lot and as far as hitting an animal in a vital spot verses a non-vital spot it couldn't have happened. I would be lucky to just hit the target. All my .02 worth though.

In the Backwoodsman magazine, May/June 2016, there is an article on making a Montagnard crossbow. These are not very powerful bows -- all that I've shot (originals) I would say were about 30 lbs pull. The author's version can't be much more than that. But he says

I shot it for distance and boy was I surprised. The arrow flew 82 yards, which was about twice what I was expecting. The crazy thing is the arrow hit a treated wood post in front of my shop at the end of the flight and the sharpened wooden point stuck 1/2" into the post.

I would expect my 55-lb recurve to do much better with a target point.

In actual hunting situations, the arrow normally goes completely through the deer -- often being caught on exiting by the fletching, so the animal makes it's final run with a couple of feet of arrow sticking out one side and rattling on the brush.