Crossbow Compromise Reached???

gwhilikerz

Banned
Oct 16, 2004
1,841
Rick we got more days to hunt. You got to keep some of your season "exclusive". I would say that is "Victory" for both sides:). Now I'm going out to buy a crossbow. I'll use it this next season and make sure I don't take anything with it. Then when kdfwr looks at the stats they will give me more days the next year:D. Yeah, sure I'm gonna let your trophy buck walk right past my stand:D
 

letmfly

6 pointer
Feb 19, 2006
427
I'm not real familiar with all that's going on with the legislation on the crossbow expansion, but I don't know why that with all of the opposing to it that they didn't just phase it in little by little in the first place. It sounds like that's the way it might end up anyway. I'm not a crossbow hunter, although I did take my son's excalibur out one day last season during the late muzzleloader season and missed a doe! I am sticking with my compound, and going to try shooting a recurve. But my son is a crossbow hunter at least until he's old enough and accurate enough with a compound. He got his first deer this year, and second, with a crossbow. I don't gun hunt anymore, but I support gun hunting too. Now alot of people will say, well that kid got two deer with a crossbow it must be so easy to kill with it. I sat with him in a double treestand and we had to wait a good long time for those deer to get close! And to turn broadside. Most people opposing the crossbow have never picked one up. I'm glad the season is getting expanded a bit, I'll get to sit in a treestand with my 11 year old son in Oct. and maybe, just maybe we'll get to experience him getting his third deer.
 
Kansas,

I guess what I'm saying is that the issue between bowhunters and crossbow hunters has at this time ended in a compromise and not a victory. What the department decides to do from this point based on the impact on the resource (positive or negative) is another thing. Evaluating the crossbow's impact should be handled differently by evaluating it very accurately and with scrutiny due to the mess that it has already caused among hunters, the KFWD, and State officials.

Personally I think the compromise was not in the best interest of sportsman in general. If one party or the other would have been victorious, then we would have had closure. The way it stands now, we will battle over this issue every year and continue to divide.
 

Kansas

Spike
Mar 8, 2005
97
Rackophrenic Rick said:
Kansas,

I guess what I'm saying is that the issue between bowhunters and crossbow hunters has at this time ended in a compromise and not a victory. What the department decides to do from this point based on the impact on the resource (positive or negative) is another thing. Evaluating the crossbow's impact should be handled differently by evaluating it very accurately and with scrutiny due to the mess that it has already caused among hunters, the KFWD, and State officials.

Personally I think the compromise was not in the best interest of sportsman in general. If one party or the other would have been victorious, then we would have had closure. The way it stands now, we will battle over this issue every year and continue to divide.

Rick
It is a victory for the crossbow because they gained days and they opened the door a little wider for the future. If the bow guys had kept it out completely, you woud be having the same battle next year. Now, the state can look at the data gathered, show the bow guys that it hd virtually 0 impact on the resouce and adjust accordingly. The bow guys don't want to share the woods, and that is their right I suppose, but it is not "their" season. It is the states season to do as they see fit. If it means more crossbow days, then great. If it means the politicians can strong arm the DNR to leave it for a while, then it is what it is. Both groups got some of what they wanted. Maybe it doens't go in the W column, but it doesn't go in the L column either.
Kansas
 

schuyler olt

12 pointer
Dec 10, 2002
2,728
.
I have no problem calling this a victory for everyone and everything concerned.

But we need to learn something from it. We need to learn that when issues arise which we know will be divisive, we need to talk first and act later.

Ultimately, the real victory here was in the sense of the process. We showed that even at the extreme point at which we found ourselves, Kentucky sportsmen could still come to agreement. Our ardor in carrying the fight speaks well of us. Our ability to still come to agreement speaks even more highly.

I was not involved in the compromise process. To those who were, I say thanks and job well done.
 
Nov 18, 2005
63

Rick
It is a victory for the crossbow because they gained days and they opened the door a little wider for the future. If the bow guys had kept it out completely, you woud be having the same battle next year. Now, the state can look at the data gathered, show the bow guys that it hd virtually 0 impact on the resouce and adjust accordingly. The bow guys don't want to share the woods, and that is their right I suppose, but it is not "their" season. It is the states season to do as they see fit. If it means more crossbow days, then great. If it means the politicians can strong arm the DNR to leave it for a while, then it is what it is. Both groups got some of what they wanted. Maybe it doens't go in the W column, but it doesn't go in the L column either.

Gee KS, might as well start the fight now huh?? This is exactly why people didn’t want to compromise in the first place, we all know this is a stepping stone for full expansion, you are not interested in compromise at all. And lets stop with the attacks please, no one said we don’t want to share the woods, we all share, we share with gun hunters, when it’s their turn, we share with bird watchers, we share with anyone that wants to play by the rules.
 

sirgiovanni

8 pointer
Mar 11, 2004
926
Evansville, IN, USA.
Am I misunderstanding what's going on? I understand the compromise and that may be good or bad for different types of hunters. But I thought the overall uniting concern was that the Department was to remain in control of the regulations? Is that not the Victory? I'm not being smart, just confused.
 

aceoky

12 pointer
Jul 14, 2003
13,460
W KY
sirgiovanni said:
Am I misunderstanding what's going on? I understand the compromise and that may be good or bad for different types of hunters.

But I thought the overall uniting concern was that the Department was to remain in control of the regulations? Is that not the Victory? I'm not being smart, just confused.

Speaking of that, what is the status of SB 211?
 

aceoky

12 pointer
Jul 14, 2003
13,460
W KY
Prohunter1776 said:



Gee KS, might as well start the fight now huh?? This is exactly why people didn’t want to compromise in the first place, we all know this is a stepping stone for full expansion, you are not interested in compromise at all. And lets stop with the attacks please, no one said we don’t want to share the woods, we all share, we share with gun hunters, when it’s their turn, we share with bird watchers, we share with anyone that wants to play by the rules.

Yeah, you've certianly been the voice of unity......NOT.........

It's not "over" even a day, and already stirring for the future....

Don't you have enough to worry about in your HOME state, rather than in a state you've never hunted??

BTW which column does SB 211 go into?
 
Last edited:
Nov 18, 2005
63
Don't you have enough to worry about in your HOME state, rather than in a state you've admited you'll never hunt??

I never admitted this at all Ace, are you mistaken or are you lying on purpose? Another attack by the pro side, for no reason.

I think this was asked before way back, now that you didn’t get full expansion are you going to let it go and be satisfied with the results????

And I’m not sure what column it goes in, I think from what I have read here that it goes in the compromise column.
 

aceoky

12 pointer
Jul 14, 2003
13,460
W KY
Again, it would be best for you to worry about your own home state, when it's "perfect", maybe someone here will care..........Are you saying you have hunted in Ky??? Then why bother? Again, I really am not concerned with your opinions on our process, or how you "view" any outcomes of anything......maybe someone actually is, but it's not me...
 

daking

12 pointer
Dec 29, 2004
2,604
Pro, there is plenty of time for further discussion later. Right now, let's just see what happens with the present season. Is there a good reason to stir up the fecal matter right now? Apparently you think so, but maybe it would be better to cool your jets and let's see how the season shakes out. Maybe it's too much. Maybe it's not enough. We are at the beginnig of the experiment.

We don't need a lot of provacation at this point. You are doing no one any good.
 
Nov 18, 2005
63
Daking, I’m all for that, if you will look at my post you will see I was only responding to the stirring done by KS and Ace, maybe you should advise them the same as you did me.

And Ace like it or not we live in the UNITED States, what you do in KY does concern me. And stop back peddling, you said that I said, I would never hunt in KY, not that I hadn’t hunted, so are you going to admit your mistake, or admit you made it up on purpose?
 

aceoky

12 pointer
Jul 14, 2003
13,460
W KY
I made up nothing Tim(FreeRange) said he had never hunted in Ky and probably never would it's here, and as you well know he has more than a few posts under this name, that is also here as well........For anyone who would like to look at past posts in this very forum.........

So much for your saying I was "stirring", I simply asked what is the status of SB 211....IF that's stirring need I remind you that I am also an American??? YOU decide to stir things said by Kansas,(and only then did I respond.....who's doing the stirring.....nevermind we all know).. and for no good reason, just as some want to ask the "Victory" question, and that won't let things go onward nor forward.......

IF you'd do more reading and less stirring , since you want to bring up MY "stirring", then you would know that SB 211 being withdrawn was my #1 priority, thus it does not go in the "compromise" column(which doesn't exist either, .....speaking of making things up on purpose)......and thank you for letting me in on where we live.:rolleyes:

Yep a crossbow expansion in Ky. will likely cause many problems in Co. Before you know it they'll outlaw Elk and probably mule deer hunting there because of this........

Bottom line you have yet to add anything postive to any of this, and I don't think you ever intended to do so. You have been asked many, many times to do so, or do it elsewhere, by many...but you insist on trying to stir things every single chance you get.....after awhile it gets old for many people. Even now , when the full expansion didn't happen, that you were "so concerned" about rather than saying "good" (or whatever), you instead try to drive more wedges and cause further divisons, IMHO WE can all do without those tactics.......

And still, I have no concern with your views.....mainly because of my above points.
 
Last edited:


Latest posts

Top