Crossbows

Archery has existed for centuries, one of humans greatest and most life changing inventions. The crossbow has been around not quite as long, but still dates to Chinese and Greek B.C. era times. This means the argument surrounding the two has likely been around just as long. Crossbows certainly have their place in effectively every application for longbows (Longbows will be the generic defining term for all upright vertical bows that you manually pull back. Longbows, recurve bows, compound bows, etc.). There are even some circumstances where the crossbow is the only form of applicable archery. So what is the big deal with them, why is there seemingly so much division surrounding the application and use of the stick and string when you lay it on its side and add a trigger?

If you know archery even in the slightest, you know the fundamental similarities and differences between crossbows and longbows. They both require you to pull back a string, they require some kind of distance interpretation that then coincides with a sight or aiming system, and they both shoot a pointy stick (arrow for a longbow, bolt for a crossbow). Fundamentally, they are extremely similar. But, there are important differences as well. One of the biggest differences is the simple fact that you don't have to hold the weight of the draw with a crossbow. With that, manufacturers have been able to make very heavy weighted crossbows that effectively wouldn't be applicable or practical if attempted with a longbow. The other major difference, and one that I hear brought up when discussing hunting is the need to practice. Because crossbows effectively operate like a rifle, you can sight them in once and anyone that can hold it steady can shoot it. With a longbow, it requires practice. Not only that, but generally speaking you can’t just hand your longbow to someone else and they can immediately be lethally effective with it.

I can understand the practice element argument of the crossbow, but I personally do not believe that is any legitimate reason to ban crossbows from archery hunting seasons, or necessarily even to give them their own season. I don’t care if the guy next door or next to me on public land uses a crossbow, so long as it is just as fair as using a longbow. That is where I believe the conversation starts to break apart with crossbows and longbows going their separate ways. It all comes down to the purpose of the seasons set by the DNRs. Archery season is usually longer because it's obviously more difficult to successfully harvest a deer with a bow of any kind. The reason it is more difficult is because you have to be closer. Period, that's really it. We can discuss all of the marginal scenarios as to why crossbows should be permitted; children and seniors may not be able to pull a longbow back, there are the disabled or handicapped, and no one argues those scenarios as I think they shouldn't. When it comes down to it, archery season is set up the way it is simply because you have to be closer to successfully harvest a deer, whether that is an arrow or bolt going through them at 30 yards doesn't make a difference to me.

As stated, my position that I do not care is based on the principle of fairness that ultimately comes down to the difficulty involved in ethically getting on a deer. This is where I see crossbow manufacturers ultimately digging their own grave. Crossbows technology is starting to push over into some impressive stuff. We're talking nail drivers at 100 yards type of stuff. Cranks that pull back the draw string so you no longer have to be able to physically pull the string back yourself, and other technological advancements that are making the crossbow less and less like a piece of archery equipment. I am all for making the hunt easier; I use a compound bow, range finder, modern release, all of that kind of stuff. But, even with all of that and a lot of practice I do not believe that I could outshoot a crossbow that just needs sighted in one time. Where that falls into hunting is the following question. Do the technological advances being applied to crossbows make it easier to successfully harvest a deer?

I think that everything kept inside of 50 yards (which in itself is a pretty wildly far longbow shot) it's pretty much an apples to apples comparison. There are the obvious differences as stated above, but I don't care if someone doesn't want to have to hold the weight of their draw back so they elect to shoot a crossbow. Once that range starts extending out to 60,70,80+ yards there is an argument to be made that due to the capabilities of the crossbow, there is an unfair advantage that undermines the reason for having a longer archery season. I believe that crossbow manufacturers are the ones pushing those limits and ultimately the ones presenting their crossbows as capable of doing so. But, like every other aspect of the conversation, its just not that simple. Manufacturers may make these elite weapons and you may be able to hit a paper plate at 100 yards. But CAN you hit a live animal that far away and SHOULD you?

One strong argument for the crossbow side, even with the capabilities they have, is ethicacy. Should you be taking a 60,70,80+ yard shot on a live animal with a stick and string, regardless if it can drive bullseyes at 100 yards. There so much more that goes into archery and the flight of an arrow at that distance, the conversation that can reel those concerns I believe is being an ethical archery hunter. That same conversation goes for a longbow, the difference is just distance. It's just so much easier with a crossbow, therefore I think it has more of a “slippery slope” downfall. Someone could pick up a longbow, shoot it for a day and think their effective range is 20 yards when in reality it's probably 10, so they go out in the woods and never get on a deer because they can't get closer than 40-50 yards to one. That same person could shoot a sighted in brand new crossbow for 10 minutes and think their effective range is 75 yards since they’re hitting a paper plate out to 100. Then they go out in the woods and start making unethical shots. That is a big legitimate concern that needs to be kept in check.

Right now, I do not believe that if it weren't for crossbows, there would be Jurassic park sized deer walking the woods. I have no problem with them being used in the normal archery season, if it gets someone out in the woods then it gets someone out in the woods. Simultaneously, I don’t think manufacturers are doing themselves any favors. It wouldn't surprise me if crossbows eventually have their own seasons and regulations. That is pretty much like all other pieces of hunting equipment and technology. Cellular trail cameras are making waves in the hunting industry for similar reasons. At the end of the day, I really think it comes down to one simple question. What is hunting? Where is that line between going out and hunting an animal under fair chase and what is simply killing. So long as you are following the laws, you'll never hear a critical word come out of my mouth toward anyone's personal success and strategy. Somewhere between a wood longbow with no sight and an arrow head and a sighted in, self ranging, crossbow out of a heated box blind over a pile of bait with a live feed cellular trail camera is that line where you go from hunting to not hunting. Answering that question is the jumping point to answering all the other ones like should you be allowed to use crossbows during archery season.