WOAH Im just back cuz I got my first dislike...what the heck and no response or reason why...my skin is too thin for this internet thing....
Forget the debate about archery skills, getting close is what bow hunting is about. That is why I picked it up. My furthest shot on a deer was 27. I have had chances at others at further distances. However, I don't want to take shots much further. To me, anything over 40 defeats the one the most fundamental purposes of bowhunting; getting close. The skill to make the shot being irrelvant on this aspect of bowhunting.
Every man should wise up at some point and feel this way about himself. Otherwise, you may be just a boy trapped in an old man's body.
I don't have a facts., and to be honest I'm not sure anyone does. I picked 40 as an arbitrary number that I feel still presents a high enough likelihood for a clean kill the majority of the time. As I said earlier, I'm open for discussion on whether that number should be moved based on other facts or evidence. Let's assume the numbers show that the worst case scenario is a deer drops as quickly as it can within .1 second of the arrow being released. In this scenario you're best to keep shots under 25 yards in order to make a clean kill 100% of the time. I can understand and agree with that. So beyond 25 yards we're talking about a tolerance for risk. The longer the shot, the higher the risk. At some point your tolerance for risk has to collide with the ethical decision on whether or not to shoot. I still believe that 40 yards is that collision point.
If we think many compound bow hunters have this challenge, wait till crossbow hunters push the accuracy POV. Last year the manufactures convinced hunters and shooters that 100yd accuracy was the new standard. In 2018, that no longer applies. Below is a direct quote from a compound bow description on their website. It's one I personally shake my head at and I'm a marketer at heart. It's one thing to tell people your weapon is capable of being accurate to 200 yards, it's another to flat out state target game. "Built for deadly downrange accuracy, the Ravin® Crossbows R20 Sniper Crossbow Package gives hunters consistent long distance shooting ability like no other. Built around Ravin's most powerful crossbow yet, the R20 Sniper Package blends power, accuracy, and a specialized scope and mount designed to target game up to 200 yards away."
One thing we can all agree on is we want the closest possible shot. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Something not specifically being mentioned is that live deer move on 2 planes; vertically AND horizontally. A deer takes a step forward at the moment of a shot at 25 yards and your shot is only an inch or 2 back of your intent. At 45? You're talking 5 or more inches. Difference between a back of the lungs and a gut shot. Unfortunately I know from personal experience. Out to 35 yards or so most bowhunters using modern equipment can try and and successfully compensate for a change in the deers' anticipated vertical juxtaposition by aiming low- you aim low and if the deer doesn't duck; you likely miss clean/graze and the deer is fine; or hit bottom of vitals and the deer is dead with an easy recovery. Not so horizontally. You try compensating on a walking deer or even a deer that you think is going to step forward at anything past 25 and you're really asking for trouble. All of this is from a guy who has lived and learned the hard way.
Found the alternative to hippy beer. Natty now sells “Natty Daddy” with a cool 8% alcohol in 12oz cans. No hops taste. I drink basically any beer and it tastes like I’m drinking Natural Light. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You know, I am in strong opposition to your opinion overall. But the fact of the matter is that your argument has some very good embedded points to which I can, and I would imagine that the majority of hunters, would agree on. You make a very good point in terms of the opinionated correlation to age and life experience. I never really thought about it that way. Surely, age doesn't correlate concretely to ultimate correctness. I know some individuals that are far older and far less intelligent than me. Rude? Maybe. Truthful? Certainly. What you said about the youth being inherently predisposed to taking more or bigger risks than adults is very factual, and its even science. Your prefrontal cortex is not completely developed until around age 26. That's scientific code for "i'm still an impulsive lump of youthful, yet opinionated ignorance". To be extensively clear, I am by no means faulting you for having your opinion. I am not even saying you are wrong and I am right. You bring up points that are difficult to refute, though there are still many primal differences in our opinions on this particular subject. I think that this has turned into a beneficial and educational discussion, even if we never agree. You say 40 yards for everyone. I think that is ridiculous. However, one thing we can mutually agree on is that both of these stand points are merely personal opinions. The fact that I listed three different TV personalities as examples of skilled archers that are proven capable of shooting beyond what you claim to be the ethical border does not lead to the ultimate conclusion that I "think that we should not hold TV personalities to the same standard as everyone else." My listing was purely a brief listing of different individuals who are perfectly capable of exceeding your blanket statement 40 yard line. You are a TV personality in a certain sense. I didn't hold you to a "different ethical standard" Nor did I hold them to that. That was purely you filling in the lines with the wrong words. The slippery slope point is a good one. I agree. BUT, I can use your own logic to refute that statement. It is largely applicable to my own viewpoint. You use the "well this one cookie cant hurt" analogy. Seems logical, right? Well, I lost a lot of weight at one point in my life not all that long ago. I can remember multiple times during that rapid weight loss where I justified my eating of the cookie with the "one cant hurt" perspective BECAUSE of something else. For instance, lets say on Monday I try that justification and refute it within my own head because of that day's circumstances. Maybe I was sick on Monday and only burned an excess 200 calories. Now Friday rolls along and mom makes a fresh batch. I use the same justification and eat the cookie. Why? Well, because that day I burned 400 excess calories in addition to my planned 200. Did I gain weight? Nope. I still lost, as the situation permitted the extra caloric intake. This is the essence of my entire point on this subject matter. Its highly personal ad highly circumstantial. A blanket statement of no cookies or not past 40 yards may only fit the bill for one or two people out of 10 polled. Difference in bow poundage, (or metabolism), practice, as well as so many other anecdotal points that support this.
I have killed whitetails as far as 62 yds with my bow. Every one died within 15 yds and in sight. Every circumstance is different. I've also let deer walk at 25 yds that I didn't feel comfortable taking the shot on. Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Bowhunting.com Forums mobile app
No. Just the ones over 45 yds, but since I have started using Grim Reaper whitetail specials, I haven't tracked a deer in 7 years. Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Bowhunting.com Forums mobile app
I will shoot at a whitetail up to 60 yards away, as long as the conditions are perfect. If the chains and rope have it cinched to the ground nice and tight I am taking the shot Sent from my iPhone using Bowhunting.com Forums
