Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 58

Thread: Another moose shot in the face by bow. ETHICS!!!

  1. #1
    Member highestview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Haines
    Posts
    1,308

    Default Another moose shot in the face by bow. ETHICS!!!

    Born in Alaska: The boundary lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; surely I have a delightful inheritance. Psalm 16:6

  2. #2

    Default

    There needs to be a proficiency test for all archery hunters. No responsible and serious archery hunter should object to such testing.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,031

    Default

    Good luck with that. Today's once/lifetime hunter education/testing gives many hunters heartburn now.

  4. #4
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,217

    Default

    The implication that better education and/or proficiency testing would prevent this kind of thing, is premised upon the assumption that these recent head shots were not intentional, but were simply the result of poor marksmanship or bad luck. I'm not so readily convinced of that. Call me cynical.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    wasilla
    Posts
    788

    Default

    A proficiency test does not test ones stupidity when shooting at a target nor does it enforce ethical hunting practices.

    Sweepint
    Wasilla, (when not overseas)
    '' Livn' The Dream ''
    26' Hewescraft Cuddy, twin 115 Yam

  6. #6

    Default

    The first response is sorrow for the injured moose and outrage toward any shooter stupid enough to cause this. If pressed to the wall, I'll concede there's a chance that arrow deflection or other causes may have played an unknown role. Our first tendency is to assume that the shooter did this intentionally, or through total incompetence...and we'll never know the truth.

    As for hunter ed and proficiency, I see the logic when it's discussed but I remain unconvinced that it reduces or prevents this kind of thing. Many hunters don't see it as a positive. They see it as a hurdle to getting a license, and as long as the hurdle is cleared it's okay. The hurdle is forgotten as soon as the hunt begins. What's really at work here is ETHICS and the presence or lack thereof. You can teach ethics, but you can't legislate them into a man's heart.

    I absolutely hate it when an animal suffers because of man's ego, idiocy or lack of ethics afield. I'd like to put a stick through the shooter's sinus cavity and see if he could tolerate it for 24 hours.

  7. #7
    New member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    2,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    The implication that better education and/or proficiency testing would prevent this kind of thing, is premised upon the assumption that these recent head shots were not intentional, but were simply the result of poor marksmanship or bad luck. I'm not so readily convinced of that. Call me cynical.
    I agree. Things do not always go as planned, or as intended.

  8. #8
    Member Roger45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    966

    Default

    Just like with bullets, arrows will go where you aim them IF nothing happens to change its direction (or the animals). If the projectile is deflected by the wind, a tree branch, a leaf, etc. it can/will change its flight. If the animal moves, that can change things. If you miss and the arrow keeps going, it can hit something behind the one you are aiming at. What about buck fever?!! There are so many variables, passing judgement without facts is just wrong. I am all for hunter education, so don't get me wrong. I don't know of any ethical hunters that would try and take a moose down with ANY type of head shot. I have seen many discussions on IF a brisket shot is ever possible, so hitting the head straight on can come from wrong distance aiming. OTOH, I know many folks that do head shots with rifles and I have personally seen some very bad outcomes. Lastly, hunter education is now required for all new hunters...I just wish it had been available when I was a kids because I had some of the absolute WORSE education from family in my youth (ex brother-in-law could have died from his errors, literally).
    "...and then Jack chopped down the beanstock, adding murder and ecological vandalism to the theft, enticement and vandalism charges already mentioned, but he got away with it and lived happily ever after without so much as a guilty twinge about what he had done. Which proves that you can be excused just about anything if you're a hero, because no one asks the inconvenient questions." Terry Pratchett's The Hogfather

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,920

    Default

    Very sad indeed one more then one level..
    Our bow hunter education is flawed at best. It is set up for success not teaching. In Kenai we used to have to use fixed broadheads for the proficiency test and the failure rate was well above 50 percent. Why? Because a bow is not a gun. You can not sight in field points and expect them to shoot the same as broad heads. Most people who shoot a bow are have now idea how to tune a bow for correct broad head flight... Hell there a whole new broadhead industry because of it!! I have watched untuned bows shoot broad head as much as 5' different then field points at 30 plus yards! After Kenai went back to field points it was amazing how folks passed again... Proficiency tests need to be better..period.. You can't fix stupid but you can educate those who do care but are just clueless..

  10. #10

    Default

    Another thing to consider is that this may have nothing to do with archery hunting at all. It could just as easily be some teenager or other idiot who has no ties to archery hunting messing around in their back yard. The most recent moose hunting season ended almost 2 months ago, yet this moose was reported for the first time just a couple days ago.

  11. #11
    Member AKducks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Fairbanks
    Posts
    485

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bear View Post
    Very sad indeed one more then one level..
    Our bow hunter education is flawed at best. It is set up for success not teaching. In Kenai we used to have to use fixed broadheads for the proficiency test and the failure rate was well above 50 percent. Why? Because a bow is not a gun. You can not sight in field points and expect them to shoot the same as broad heads. Most people who shoot a bow are have now idea how to tune a bow for correct broad head flight... Hell there a whole new broadhead industry because of it!! I have watched untuned bows shoot broad head as much as 5' different then field points at 30 plus yards! After Kenai went back to field points it was amazing how folks passed again... Proficiency tests need to be better..period.. You can't fix stupid but you can educate those who do care but are just clueless..
    As someone who took my test last august (passed pretty easy) I couldn't agree more! The problem was I practiced all summer to pass the test then put on brodheads and found out that (I guess) my bow is not tuned up right! I had a hunt planned for the next week so I just made do (moved pins around and shortened my range felt confident that I could kill anything under 30 yards) but I still felt that the field test should be with broad heads and require a in class test on ethics (even for online people, heck get rid of the online all together)

  12. #12
    Member JOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Soldotna, ALASKA since '78
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    The "Hunger Games" has been tagged with starting a huge increase in bow sales to younger people. If you've been in SW in the last couple months, you may have noticed that the packaging on entry level, youth archery sets now clearly resembles the movie cover for the Hunger Games movies.

    For example... http://sports.yahoo.com/news/olympic...232415744.html

    I've found the tip of a wooden arrow with the old crimp-on target point embedded in a moose before. Clearly that wasn't from "hunters". Then you have the Tern Lake swan that was shot a couple years ago. That wasn't "hunters" either.

    Looking at the photo on the linked article in the OP, the position and angle of the arrow on this moose (below the eye), that could have been a miss about a foot or so to the right for a quartering head-on shot at the chest. Slight deflection or shooter error could be the cause. The moose may not have been seen for the last 2 months since the season because he's been in the wilderness and has just arrived in a populated area. So it very well could be a hunter's bad shot. Poor judgement isn't uncommon and people regularly try to take shots at longer distances than they should, with both archery and firearm hunting. The marksmanship of dealing with wind, elevation change, and terrain often seems to be a fading art.
    Winter is Coming...

    Go GeocacheAlaska!

  13. #13

    Default

    In my first post where I proposed proficiency testing I was assuming that the person who shot the moose was a hunter. I think in reality there's a good chance it wasn't a hunter at all. If that was the case, then proficiency testing of archery hunters would be irrelevant. However, I think proficiency testing tends to weed out irresponsible and unethical people since those types generally don't have their heads put together well enough to take the proficiency tests.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JOAT View Post
    The "Hunger Games" has been tagged with starting a huge increase in bow sales to younger people. If you've been in SW in the last couple months, you may have noticed that the packaging on entry level, youth archery sets now clearly resembles the movie cover for the Hunger Games movies.

    For example... http://sports.yahoo.com/news/olympic...232415744.html

    I've found the tip of a wooden arrow with the old crimp-on target point embedded in a moose before. Clearly that wasn't from "hunters". Then you have the Tern Lake swan that was shot a couple years ago. That wasn't "hunters" either.

    Looking at the photo on the linked article in the OP, the position and angle of the arrow on this moose (below the eye), that could have been a miss about a foot or so to the right for a quartering head-on shot at the chest. Slight deflection or shooter error could be the cause. The moose may not have been seen for the last 2 months since the season because he's been in the wilderness and has just arrived in a populated area. So it very well could be a hunter's bad shot. Poor judgement isn't uncommon and people regularly try to take shots at longer distances than they should, with both archery and firearm hunting. The marksmanship of dealing with wind, elevation change, and terrain often seems to be a fading art.
    I agree. It very well could be a "leftover" from the past hunting season, but just wanted to throw that out there so we didn't get too stuck on attacking a hunter when it could easily be some other situation.

    I can easily see where someone who gets overly excited may opt for a shot they shouldn't take, especially a new hunter. Heck, the last two moose I have gotten, both in Fairbanks, with my bow have involved waiting 20+ minutes for them to get clear of alders/brush that might impact the trajectory of the shot. I stood there within 10-20 yards of the moose, with a clear view of it, but just through some brush. To say the thought of just taking the shot (after all, it was really close....) crossed my mind, but the immediate next thought was the chance of a deflection, so I waited knowing that the result could be losing an opportunity for any shot. Both eventually moved to a spot with a clear lane and allowed for a clean kill. You put 20 people out there in the same situation with the same archery certification and training and I'm sure more than one would have taken a shot long before I did

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wags View Post
    In my first post where I proposed proficiency testing I was assuming that the person who shot the moose was a hunter. I think in reality there's a good chance it wasn't a hunter at all. If that was the case, then proficiency testing of archery hunters would be irrelevant. However, I think proficiency testing tends to weed out irresponsible and unethical people since those types generally don't have their heads put together well enough to take the proficiency tests.
    There is a proficiency test for archery hunters, but only required for hunting in weapons restricted hunts and the test is a one-time, lifetime certification test. It is very possible for someone to take the test and then never shoot the bow again until going hunting 20+ years later. The hunts on JBER, and maybe some others, specifically add in a requirement for a proficiency test just before the actual hunt, using the equipment you will be using in the hunt (they can/will check the bow and arrows from the test to your hunt to ensure you are using what you tested with). I think this is a good program, but not sure if it is feasible to apply on a full scale. Regular recertification of some sort, similar to having to renew your driver's license every 5 years, might be an approach. You could drop in for a proficiency shoot at one of the scheduled certification classes to renew yours after a certain number of years.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Juneau
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    Muddy waters for sure.

    When I was younger I missed plenty of animals with a bow, and unfortunatley wounded some. Now, a moose's nose in most circumstances is more than 3 feet from the kill zone.....that's a pretty serious clean miss with a smaller animal but not hitting a moose somewhere would be difficult unless it was a windage low scenario. So I'm somewhat surprised it's not more common.

    My gut says this was not a hunter by our standards, but no matter what I hope they can corral that animal and either get the arrow out and treat it, or at least dispatch it before it has an extremely tough couple of weeks or more while passing on.

  17. #17

    Default

    In this case, I think it would likely be pretty easy to remove the arrow if they are successful in locating the moose when they have the right equipment available. The previous case had the broadhead still stuck in the nose itself and they ended up having to leave it in place. Based on the picture of this one, it should just be a portion (8" or so) of the shaft that should slide out cleanly.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,920

    Default

    Skier just curious. Are you a bowhunter? No offense just curious. I will say it again the problem is not with the amount of tests it's how the tests are conducted. The way they are now have NOTHING to do with hunting equipment... Zip nada. That teaches the average bow hunter or new bow hunter zero. Does anyone here know how to yoke tune broadhead flight or the effects of cam sync or what happens when you twist a control cable.


    Joat your missing one of the biggest lost art forms in bowhuntin today...RESPECT!

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bear View Post
    Skier just curious. Are you a bowhunter? No offense just curious.
    If you read my post, it should be clear. Yes, I am a bowhunter. Just got my 3rd moose (in addition to one elk) by bow this last November in Fairbanks.

    I agree that the class can be improved. I took it before you could just do the online thing that is available now. I think there is a lot of value with actually having to sit there in the classroom with face to face contact with the person teaching the course. Even with that, it does only touch on the basics and leaves a lot of "continuing education" type stuff up to each individual.

  20. #20
    Member alaskabliss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Wasilla
    Posts
    1,419

    Default

    I think its best to prove a hunter did the deed before we assume we need to change the way a hunter can hunt with Archery equipment. As previously stated, it could be a teen or even a drunk idiot taking pot shots with his new bow.
    The archery class does teach us a lot. A lot of it we should already know from hunting with a firearm. I don't think the course is intended to teach us how to shoot a bow but more the ethics behind it. The proficency portion may seem flawed but what are the suggestions to make it more realistic? Wanna scare the crap out of someone to get the adrenalin flowing then tell them to shoot 50 yards?
    There are way more incidents with firearms then archery. We have heard of only a few archery issues, they are obvious from the arrow protruding from there bodies, but what about bullets? There not as visiable to the general public and they are more tolerated since there are many more instances where a guy shoots an animal and hits it poorly. Firearms are more likely to kill an ill shot animal and may never appear in public. lots of variables.
    I think the knee jerk reaction and insults to the current system is off based. There is a bigger picture. and yes I a bow hunter...
    Ignorance is not Bliss, it's insanity

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •