New Jersey Hunters banner
41 - 60 of 125 Posts
I have not been hunting for long, even though I have had my ticket since I was 18. I still consider myself quite the novice. Available time over the last 16 years has made it rather difficult to get out and enjoy and improve myself in the sport. What I got from the original post is that it really all comes down to ethics and fair chase. They seem to push fair chase a great deal in the Hunters ED course here in NJ, as I'm sure they do in all states. It really is not a matter of the implement used to hunt, but how we hunt that defines our ethics.

Just as an example, I have been out plenty of times pheasant hunting, and you always walk up on the guys before first light who are standing beneath a tree with 3 or more birds roosting in the branches, and they are just waiting till they they take the first shots and knock them out of the tree. Personally, I have a problem with that, and would never do it. That being said, I will not judge anyone either. If you can go home at the end of your day and sleep at night with no qualms about how your filled your tag, more power to you. Thats not me. Same goes for the guys that shoot young bucks with barely any antlers. Sure the regs say at least 3 inches of a spike, but again, I won't do it. Thats not me. The whole question about crossbows comes down to the fact that you still need to attain some skill and accuracy with the weapon to fill your tag, just like any other weapon you may use. If you can't hit the side of the barn with it, you're not going to kill a deer. I personally am happy they are allowing it. My dad does not want to bow hunt since he is older. When I mentioned them allowing crossbow, he was thrilled and wants to go and get his ticket. The crossbow will be easier on him in the field. I benefit since I get to spend more time with the man in the field, which is something we did not get to do together when I was growing up.

The bottom line is this, use whatever implement makes you happy, and use it effectively. If a sling with a rock is your bag, go for it. Do it ethically, and humanely. And by all means, don't make the rest of us hunters look like a#@holes. People are just looking for a reason to get rid of our sport.

Just my $0.02.
 
Once again can I get an amen on this? SPECULATION FROM A PROJECTION AND IF YOUR FOOLISH ENOUGH TO BELIEVE A WORD FISH AND GAME SAYS AND FOR THAT MATTER ANY FISH AND GAME IN ANY STATE!

THEY LIE AND ARE GULITY OF MANY THINGS UNPARDONABLE AT BEST!

Who cares how many give up hunting and what would be there reasons for that no deer? Well then they aren't killers then are they!

Like I said a killer goes about their business and brings home whatever they want not what they can shoot because by them being a killer it's already desided.

God has created us to all be unique individuals.
Was that so we can serve ourself?????? Or is that so we can serve God?

Misusage of a lot of things here in this post is what it appears to me thats goin down[smirk]
 
HERES SOMETHING ELSE TO CONSIDER AND I JUST WONDER HOW MANY ARCHERS WILL TRADE IN THEIR BOWS FOR THE CROSSBOWS?

Don't think for one minute that it is not going to happen because it did in Pa. and I was very supprized who they were when they did.[smirk]

Maybe this is another issue that others have been reluctant to bring up that they will quit the UBNJ when the time comes???????

Just a thought? Not sure if this issue can ever be resolved favorably for all.
 
Cat, clearly there is an issue with X-bows. Are there any studies from other states that show that the use of X-bows for deer hunting has really had such a bad effect on the sport? Coming from the medical field, I'm big on cold hard facts. Would like to see if there is evidence proving it is detrimental.

Clearly its not for everyone, but to each his own
 
Are there any studies from other states that show that the use of X-bows for deer hunting has really had such a bad effect on the sport? Coming from the medical field, I'm big on cold hard facts. Would like to see if there is evidence proving it is detrimental.
NO state has shown any evidence. OH has allowed them for 30 yrs. Same fear was thrown out there when compounds were fought for. Same old arguments.

Clearly its not for everyone, but to each his own
[up][up]
 
“I support any and all methods of hunting and fishing and all those who participate in these traditions, provided that they always remain ethical and legal in the pursuit of their particular endeavor.” While not everything will always be something I might want to personally participate in, I will not fault or bad mouth anyone who chooses to see things differently form me. If they are fellow sportsman who are ethical and legal in their pursuits, they are my brothers and sisters and I support them. I hope those of you who have read this will agree!
Amen.
But, I truly respect those that will fight to the death an issue they are passionate about in an articulate, fact driven manner.
Win, lose or draw, fight the good fight gentlemen...
 
Unsportsman like in what way? Is there some full-auto, heat seeking crossbow with explosive tips out there that Cabelas is carrying? If so, SIGN ME UP!!

In all seriousness though, not shooting a bird on a ground is something entirely different from using a x-bow to hunt. Its like using a saw instead of an axe. They both accomplish the same thing but are two different tools. Using a bow takes skill, honed by practice, as does using a firearm or a x-bow. Each is a different method which ultimately takes some time, patience, and practice to become proficient at. Just because I walk into the woods during bow season with a x-bow does not mean I am going to get a deer everytime. Same holds true for a bow (compound or other) or for a firearm. If you can't shoot, you can't shoot, no matter what you use. Will the use of crossbows increase the number of hunters in the woods, undoubtedly. Haven't we been promoting the sport to get more people involved for years? Why is it now that there is a way to do just that, we condemn the implement used to introduce more people to it? Hunters with disabilities have been allowed to use x-bows with no issue, should that have been put down when it started? It makes no sense.

We can all sit here and argue the pros and cons of it, but ultimately it will solve nothing. I agree with Dubs. Lets see what happens.
 
So in other words, theres nothing proving they are bad, just people who cannot tolerate change.
Actually, that is propaganda from the crossbow manufacturers.
Are there any studies from other states that show that the use of X-bows for deer hunting has really had such a bad effect on the sport? Coming from the medical field, I'm big on cold hard facts. Would like to see if there is evidence proving it is detrimental.
The fact is, full inclusion is only permitted in a few states, and none of those states have seasons or bag limits structured like NJ.

In other states where full inclusion is permitted, it does not have the same potential to impact the resource that it does in NJ. The regulations are vastly different, particularly the one glaring difference that in each of the few states that allow full inclusion of crossbows, ALL have a lower buck limit, and those tags can be filled with any weapon. Only seven of the 50 states allow full inclusion. In each of the seven states, the buck limit is fixed, and the tags can be filled with any weapon.

In Georgia, 2 bucks maximum, any weapon.
In Ohio, one buck maximum, any weapon
In Tennessee, 2 or 3 bucks maximum, depending on where you are in the state, with any weapon.
In Arkansas, 2 bucks maximum, and tags can be filled with any weapon.
In Wyoming, one buck maximum, any weapon.
In Virginia, 3 bucks maximum, any weapon.
In Alabama, 2 bucks maximum, any weapon.

Many of these states also have antler restrictions on one or all buck tags.

In each of these states, if every single gun hunter picked up a crossbow and hunted bow season, it would not impact the resource because if they filled their buck tags during that time, they could not go back in gun season and kill more. That is not the case in New Jersey, and therefore, saying crossbows didn’t have an impact in the few other states where full inclusion is permitted, is a foolish argument.

If the survey the Division constructed is correct, there will be approximately 30,152 ADDITIONAL hunters in bow season immediately, if you allow crossbows in bow season. That comes from page 4, where the survey revealed 59% of gun-only hunters will use a crossbow now if legal. On page 5, the Division states the resident hunter population at 85,957 hunters. The Division also tells us there were 34,851 bow hunters in 2007. Doing the math with the surveys numbers, you find that 85,957 hunters, minus 34,851 bow hunters, equals 51,106 gun-only hunters.
59% of that number is 30,152 hunters that will use a crossbow now if legalized, if you believe the, highly touted, scientifically sound and accurate, survey.

That means an additional 90,000+ bucks can legally be harvested. That is not true in any of the seven other states where full inclusion is permitted, not one. In fact, NO additional deer could be harvested if EVERY gun hunter took to bow season with a crossbow in each of those seven states, not ONE. That is NOT true in New Jersey.

Consider the points made by crossbow manufacturers and their advocates; 1) there will be no negative affect on bow season, and 2) crossbow hunters will have the same success rate as bow hunters. Assuming no negative affect on bow season, the harvest rate will stay about the same. In 2007, 34,851 New Jersey bow hunters killed approximately 17,312 deer, for a rate of about one deer per two hunters. Adding approximately 30,000 hunters to bow season, with the same success rate, and no negative affect on the season, the survey and crossbow advocates predict there will be an additional 15,000 deer killed.

That is the potential impact on the resource in NJ. That same potential impact is NOT present in ANY of the few states that have permitted full inclusion...not one of them. Also, in each of the few states that have permitted full inclusion, all of them had deer herds that were expanding, and in need of being reduced. That again is NOT the case in NJ.

Our deer herd has been reduced from approximately 200,000 animals 7 or 8 years ago, to an estimate from the Division this year of 120,000 animals. Another glaring difference between New Jersey and these few other states crossbow have tried to use as evidence what happened there will happen here.

Pa seems like it will be a new convert, but look at the regs in Pa...same as the others, one buck with any weapon.

If Pa had one million hunters, and only 10,000 were bow hunters, and the other 990,000 picked up a crossbow and entered bow season, it has zero potential to impact the herd..they still all can kill only one buck.

That move does not create the potential for even one more deer to be killed. Same could be said for Ohio, Va, and each of the other few states that allow full inclusion of crossbows.

In NJ that is not true. So, again, the difference is, in each of the few other states that allow full inclusion, there is no potential for even one more buck to be killed. In NJ, there is potential for thousands more to be killed.

That is a real issue you can't just dismiss and it IS what makes NJ different from the other crossbow testing grounds.
 
So why not limit the amount of bucks allowed perseason further, or limit per antler size. If the argument is not to decimate the population based on the current bag limits, limit hunter to one buck per season no matter the weapon. Granted this statement will probably anger some mebers on here, but me personally, I would rather see Fish & Wildlife limit the number of bucks per year further, so that we can see NJ grow some bigger animals.

Also, despite the estimation of how many more hunters will be in the field as a result of allowing x-bows, that is an estimate, and speculation at best. The number could be smaller and of course it could also be bigger. Of the 30,000 estimated that will pick up a crossbow, how many will actually do it? Theres no way of predicting. You have to remember, that it is yet another expense to add a new weapon to your arsenal which may deter people from doing it.
 
So why not limit the amount of bucks allowed perseason further, or limit per antler size. If the argument is not to decimate the population based on the current bag limits, limit hunter to one buck per season no matter the weapon. Granted this statement will probably anger some mebers on here, but me personally, I would rather see Fish & Wildlife limit the number of bucks per year further, so that we can see NJ grow some bigger animals.
[up][up][up][up]
and get rid of unlimited doe harvests
 
IMO, this thread totally confuses the issue of taking a stand against a form of hunting with taking a stand against the INCLUSION of a form of hunting into a particular season. They are very different things.
 
I agree, if we want a better herd, and a larger herd, perhaps we should limit the animals we harvest. Keep that going till we have a sufficient mature heard, and then loosen the restrictions. Run the state like the Managed properties you hear of out west. Keep the bucks to a certain age and then harvest them. I am not out for just the meat, I am out for the sport of it. And that means I won't always get a deer. I'm ok with that. Deer or no deer, its a day in the field.
 
Maybe even have the state subsidizing food plots on the WMA's. We can get some soy fields and corn fields planted, and really some large deer growing. I personally would be willing to contribute from my pocket to help with that as well. Maybe have Jeff Foxworthy and Tecomate come out here, plant us some plots and have at it.
 
So why not limit the amount of bucks allowed perseason further, or limit per antler size.
Good idea, but they are NOT doing that, and have no intention of doing that.

The issue is over what they are going to do to us.

despite the estimation of how many more hunters will be in the field as a result of allowing x-bows, that is an estimate, and speculation at best. The number could be smaller and of course it could also be bigger. Of the 30,000 estimated that will pick up a crossbow, how many will actually do it? Theres no way of predicting.
The problem with this thought is the Division says this number IS accurate to within +/- 3 percent.

They did this crossbow survey that they have touted as being scientifically sound and accurate. They used the information from the survey to prop up the idea of full inclusion, by showing us that the survey revealed how popular crossbows are, how many people support them and want to use them, so we should do this full inclusion idea because SO many hunters want it. These numbers come right from that survey.

What I find funny is that they hold that survey up as some sort of gospel, yet run away like scared rabbits from the parts of it that don't help their cause.

The survey is either accurate in predicting what hunters think about crossbows, or it isn't. They used it to support their claim that crossbows had all this support, yet when you put the numbers to that support...they stutter and say..."well, well, we don't think THAT will happen".

They seem to want to have it both ways; the survey is accurate where they want it to be, and where they don't want it to be, it's not accurate. [rofl][rofl]
 
41 - 60 of 125 Posts