Hey guys, I have a topic which may spur some debate among the community; poison arrows. In my home state of NY there is nothing in the law forbidding the use of poison tipped arrows. I searched the web for regulations pretty thoroughly and the closest thing I could find is this; "It is illegal to take or hunt wildlife with any device designed or intended to deliver drugs to an animal." Were broad head manufacturers(toxic, rage, etc) intending for broad heads to be used to deliver drugs to an animal? Absolutely not. Are broad heads designed to deliver drugs to an animal? Nope. Broad heads are designed and intended to be used to slice through flesh easily and efficiently. Nothing more, nothing less. I believe that part of the law is in reference to tranquilizer darts and the like. So, now that we've cleared that up it begs the question; Is it ethical? Some may say it's unsportsmanlike like. However one could argue that it is in fact more traditional, because that's the way some native Americans(or south Americans, rather) did it. Is it humane? Well, assuming the animal doesn't die within a few minutes of hitting it with an un-poisoned broad head, it probably means you missed it's main vital organs.(debatable...but bear with me) Wouldn't you want some type 'insurance' if you will, that the animal will die minutes after hitting it, regardless of shot placement? But wouldn't using poison arrows foul the meat? I suppose that depends on the poison. If you're using arsenic or something of that nature, then yes, it would probably spoil the meat. However, something like highly concentrated nicotine would dissipate and degrade quickly enough so that there would be absolutely no spoilage to the meat. Sure, there may be some trace amounts left over, but not enough to even remotely poison anyone who eats the meat. But I don't want nicotine in my meat. I don't want to consume any nicotine because 'insert reason here' Well, if that's the case, stop eating tomatoes, potatoes, eggplant, and any other plant that contains nicotine in trace amounts. Thoughts?
Legality aside, I'd hate to get pricked by the dart or whatever holds the poison, I know I have sliced myself with a broadhead a time or two. IL law states tips must be broadheads, would defeat the need of poison. Minimum arrow length is 20 inches and broadheads must be used. Broadheads may have fixed or expandable cutting surfaces, but they must have a minimum 7/8 inch diameter when fully opened. Broadheads with fixed cutting surfaces must be metal or flint-chert-or obsidian-knapped; broadheads with expandable cutting surfaces must be metal. I don't think blow guns woyld be legal here as most of the wildlife code states what is legal to take game with, not what is illegal. So if it's not legal it would be deemed illegal by default.
Wouldn't want to taint the meat, Deer recovery would be more difficult with less of a blood trail and personally it just does not appeal to me for deer. Coyote control yes.
Did you read the OP? It wouldn't taint the meat. A regular broad head would be used so the same amount of blood would be present poisoned or un-poisoned if the same hit was made.
Fair point. It would suck to get cut by a broad head dripping with nicotine. I may do a test just for kicks to see if a mock poison(blue dyed water) will spray back off the head when shot from the bow. It wouldn't be nice to get sprayed with nicotine. Using broad heads does not guarantee a kill. Sometimes your shooting is off for whatever reason and you don't hit a vital organ.
I don't get it. If you don't enjoy the challenge of hunting with a bow and just want a dead deer, why not just hunt with a gun?
From my understanding on how the poison pods work, no way to hurt yourself because the pod is behind the head. I've never seen one but know a guy that used to make them.
And they are illegal in 49 states. Only one where they are legal I believe is MS, and there is something funny about the law there even. Something like they are legal to use but illegal to purchase or something along those lines.
Just seems counterproductive, would be like wanting to put an explosive tip on a shotgun slug for more lethality. All it would do as described would be to create a 95% killzone on a deer and that would effectively eliminate the challenge and sport of it encouraging poor shot placement. When you said poison arrows, I was hoping you meant darts instead. Something like that with a blow gun might intrigue me enough should it be legal, but lacing a broadhead with "poison" is silly.
I had to read this a couple of times and no matter how many times I read it I keep coming up with the same thought...WTF! Really lets use a poison arrow so it doesn't matter where we hit the deer it is going to die anyway. A HUGE part of being a bow hunter is making sure you can put the arrow in the right spot to get a clean and ethical kill and knowing when you do not have a shot.
Poison is a drug. Your intent would be to deliver the drug by arrow. Plainly illegal by definition. Nothing more to consider.
I believe you are correct on the Mississippi law. I am not for them just providing more info on them. Don't want anything to do with them.
Definition of overkill... If someone is incapable of consistently executing clean kills with a bow and arrow (without some gimmick) then they maybe should consider hanging up their bow and picking up a golf club.
Well, yes I did. It was not clear that you were using a regular broadhead in the OP. Does not change my opinion though. Having "insurance" as you refer to it would encourage poor shot selection. Poor shot selection encourages poor hits which, trust me on this, produce poor blood trails regardless of the type of broadhead that you may or may not shoot. A well hit deer can go up to 100 yards possibly 200 yards before it expires and they are sometimes hard to find in heavy brush with marginal blood trails, typically happens with no exit wound say when you hit an offside shoulder. A poorly hit deer can go a loooong way if pushed and the chances of recovery go way down. As to the tainted meat statement I would not want to eat a cow or a hog that had been poisoned so why would I want to eat a deer, thats just my opinion. So I stand by my original statements. I recognize that you are just getting into bowhunting and I welcome you to the sport and wish you every success.
Ummm......really op?? If you do your job as an ethical hunter the arrow should be placed in the killzone and the deer will be dead within 30-60 seconds. rendering your post THE DUMBEST POST EVER
How many of you have ever shot a deer outside of the kill zone by accident? How many of you know an experienced hunter who shot one outside the kill zone by accident? At some point in time, I'm betting the strong majority of people on this board have themselves, or know someone who has shot outside of the kill zone. Mistakes happen. People are not perfect and neither is equipment. Bad shots happen. It's not unheard of. I'm not saying use poison and don't practice because it won't matter where you hit it anyway. I'm saying practice as much as you can regardless, and I'm arguing that in the event that you don't hit the kill zone you will have the added insurance of the deer having a quick death. For the record, I won't be using poison. As a previous posted said the law usually states what is legal to hunt with, not what's illegal. I don't need poison to kill a deer and I'd rather not get into trouble, especially my first season hunting. It's unfortunate that some of you couldn't debate this intelligently and just bashed me for bringing it up. Thanks to all those who didn't, and actually entertained [what I deem to be] a worthy topic to be discussed among the bow community
Sometimes a bad idea needs to be called out for what it is. Hunting with poisoned arrows is a bad idea, which is why it's illegal in 49/50 states.
