bowhunt scotland?????!!!!!!
- Thread starter jerv
- Start date
-
Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.
That quote is peppered all over the interweb thingy. I can't find any grounds for it in the real world though.
I'd be interested if anyone comes up with something to confirm it.
I'd be interested if anyone comes up with something to confirm it.
Would be great if it was legalised. Im no bowyer - but it would give me good reason and perpose to learn.
I just cant stomach standing there poppin off rounds at a target. Iv never tried target archery, but I was a member of a smallbore rifle club and it became utterly boring in about 2 months. Later on I was invited to a friend's, whom's dad owns an old milloast, where we did some small game hunting with shotguns and a .22 - it was so much more thrilling than a cr*ppy old range.
What would be the penalty for ilegal bow hunting?
I just cant stomach standing there poppin off rounds at a target. Iv never tried target archery, but I was a member of a smallbore rifle club and it became utterly boring in about 2 months. Later on I was invited to a friend's, whom's dad owns an old milloast, where we did some small game hunting with shotguns and a .22 - it was so much more thrilling than a cr*ppy old range.
What would be the penalty for ilegal bow hunting?
Please read
http://www.basc.org.uk/content/stalkingpractice
There's a damn good reason that there are strict laws about suitable weaponry to hunt deer......even in the Neolithic and Mesolithic when there was no other really viable alternative to bowhunting they didn't manage clean kills. I truly doubt that some modern numptie will manage any better.
Penalties? Apart from the criminal charges, confiscation of weapons and transport and potentially any premises used to store either the weapons or the kill.
This web based fiction about bowhunting is a travesty. Might I suggest that a little judicious reading of the SSPCA site concerning the appalling injuries inflicted on domestic animals, cattle, horses and sheep by those *practicing* with crossbows and the like would give a clearer understanding of just how hard it is to kill a beast with an arrow.
It is illegal in Scotland to shoot red deer with anything lighter than a 100 grain .204.
http://www.basc.org.uk/content/stalkingpractice
Toddy
http://www.basc.org.uk/content/stalkingpractice
There's a damn good reason that there are strict laws about suitable weaponry to hunt deer......even in the Neolithic and Mesolithic when there was no other really viable alternative to bowhunting they didn't manage clean kills. I truly doubt that some modern numptie will manage any better.
Penalties? Apart from the criminal charges, confiscation of weapons and transport and potentially any premises used to store either the weapons or the kill.
This web based fiction about bowhunting is a travesty. Might I suggest that a little judicious reading of the SSPCA site concerning the appalling injuries inflicted on domestic animals, cattle, horses and sheep by those *practicing* with crossbows and the like would give a clearer understanding of just how hard it is to kill a beast with an arrow.
It is illegal in Scotland to shoot red deer with anything lighter than a 100 grain .204.
http://www.basc.org.uk/content/stalkingpractice
Toddy
jerv said:
Scottish law differs from that of England and Wales, so in theory such a measure could be carried out. However I'm not sure the bow was every really used as a method of deer control in GB, more the occasional "poaching" of deer. Yes sure deer have been killed with bows but never really in mass numbers. The Scots had their own ways of killing large numbers of deer but it resembled little akin to bow hunting in say the US.
I can not see a need to adopt bows for deer control. IMHO bows are not a suitable tool for the job, no matter how many hunters in the US use them. A rifle is a more modern tool, more accurate and requires less skill. 'Hunters' are duty bound to kill their quarry as quickly and effectively as possible. This inherently means the use of the best most efficient tools to do the job, a rifle.
I have heard many people decry the use of such things as range finders, bi-pods and other tools that make 'hunting' more efficient, calling such things as unsporting. Well, if a rifleman gives his quarry a sporting chance, then the rifleman had better take up another sport. Rifle shooting by its very nature leave little to chance. Anyway, back on subject now
I for one, would be totally against the use of bows for the control of deer as I guess would a great number of deer managers.
Not to start an argument here but a well placed shot is a well placed shot. The parameters in which a bow is effective are far narrower than those of a rifle but if you operate within them it can be an efficient tool. If you can put an arrow through the heart and lungs of a deer, it's not going far.Toddy said:
And you shouldn't class ethical bowhunters in with psychos who get their kicks from inflicting pain on animals.
Mesolithic/neolithic peoples most likely did go for a kill shot as it would be more efficient but I'm sure they'd take a marginal shot and hope to blood trail the animal to it's death site as their lives depended on hunting.
Toddy, cool down. Please do not tar all hunting archers with the same brush.
You are quite right about the law, but I take issue with your reasoning as to why it is in place and with dragging in the actions of criminally ignorant numpties as an example of why the law is just and right. One could just as easily use the example of young joy riders tearing around the houses as a reason to bring in tighter speed limits and raise the age you are allowed to drive.
Hunting with a bow requires a lot more disipline than most people can muster, it also requires gear which most people in the UK don't have. There is a world of difference between a responsible, well practiced, bowhunter using suitable gear, and some eejit with no field craft armed with target arrows, irrespective of what bow they have.
To put it in perspective, many traditional bow hunters in the US will practice for 2-3 months prior to deer season, 30+ arrows per day, every day, until every single shot lands in a 6-8 inch circle.
Hunting with a bow is HARDER than hunting with a rifle. There is less margin for error. You have to be a better stalker, and better coordinated and practiced at shooting.
As things stand, it is probably better that bow hunting here is not permitted. There are a lot of folks who would like to hunt but cannot get a license for a rifle and would probably think that using a bow would be a short cut.
For anyone interested in another version of bowhunting than that portrayed by the SSPCA, check out http://www.tradbow.com (magazine) and http://www.stickbow.com (leatherwall forum).
Please do not tar all hunting archers with the same brush. You are quite right about the law, but I take issue with your reasoning as to why it is in place and with dragging in the actions of criminally ignorant numpties as an example of why the law is just and right. One could just as easily use the example of young joy riders tearing around the houses as a reason to bring in tighter speed limits and raise the age you are allowed to drive.
Hunting with a bow requires a lot more disipline than most people can muster, it also requires gear which most people in the UK don't have. There is a world of difference between a responsible, well practiced, bowhunter using suitable gear, and some eejit with no field craft armed with target arrows, irrespective of what bow they have.
To put it in perspective, many traditional bow hunters in the US will practice for 2-3 months prior to deer season, 30+ arrows per day, every day, until every single shot lands in a 6-8 inch circle.
Hunting with a bow is HARDER than hunting with a rifle. There is less margin for error. You have to be a better stalker, and better coordinated and practiced at shooting.
As things stand, it is probably better that bow hunting here is not permitted. There are a lot of folks who would like to hunt but cannot get a license for a rifle and would probably think that using a bow would be a short cut.
For anyone interested in another version of bowhunting than that portrayed by the SSPCA, check out http://www.tradbow.com (magazine) and http://www.stickbow.com (leatherwall forum).
No, though I do take your point, I have yet to meet any archer with the ability to kill a deer cleanly on a Scottish moorland or hillside. Target bows just don't carry well enough.
I know of deer who run for 300 metres on adrenaline and muscle alone since their hearts just aren't there after the shot from a .303, I know keepers and stalkers who are heart roasted dealing with injured beasts from the so called bowyers, too.
I also know poachers and even they use guns, despite the noise, despite the risks.
Too many arrogant, incapable people being subversively encouraged that bow shooting is somehow more acceptable, permissable and , heaven forfend, *natural*. Pathetic really.
The British army goes to war with weapons that are not considered capable enough to take out a deer........want to tell me again that a common or garden, practice an hour a month, archer is going to do better?
Sorry, not my forum, and I'll keep away from the thread now, but without a qualm I will report anyone I see using a bow on a deer, a cow, a horse, a goat, a sheep or a seal.
Regards,
Toddy
I know of deer who run for 300 metres on adrenaline and muscle alone since their hearts just aren't there after the shot from a .303, I know keepers and stalkers who are heart roasted dealing with injured beasts from the so called bowyers, too.
I also know poachers and even they use guns, despite the noise, despite the risks.
Too many arrogant, incapable people being subversively encouraged that bow shooting is somehow more acceptable, permissable and , heaven forfend, *natural*. Pathetic really.
The British army goes to war with weapons that are not considered capable enough to take out a deer........want to tell me again that a common or garden, practice an hour a month, archer is going to do better?
Sorry, not my forum, and I'll keep away from the thread now, but without a qualm I will report anyone I see using a bow on a deer, a cow, a horse, a goat, a sheep or a seal.
Regards,
Toddy
I dont think its good killing deer in the UK. There so beautiful and graceful, Im not sure I'd ever be able to bring myself to do the deed. How can you shoot them over here anyway when were such a small island - you can't shoot them lawfully unless your a richman anyway and own a bigbore.
Shooting rabbits is good enough for me and even I feel sad for the poor things - even if they are introduced 'vermin', thats why when I kill one Im gonna eat the thing up, so it is not wasted.
Shooting rabbits is good enough for me and even I feel sad for the poor things - even if they are introduced 'vermin', thats why when I kill one Im gonna eat the thing up, so it is not wasted.
C_Claycomb said:Toddy, cool down.
SNIP
Hunting with a bow requires a lot more disipline than most people can muster, it also requires gear which most people in the UK don't have. There is a world of difference between a responsible, well practiced, bowhunter using suitable gear, and some eejit with no field craft armed with target arrows, irrespective of what bow they have.
I do wonder how many deer you have stalked and shot.
The science of killing is quite simple. You have to destroy brain function and lower the blood pressure to the point where the heart stops functioning.
Even a .50cal can not do this with one shot, a bow has no chance.
When a deer is shot with a high velocity rifle bullet, there are several major things that happen. First tissue is damaged, bones are shattered and major organs (heat/lungs or brain) are destroyed. As we are talking about bow hunting, lets zero in on a typical lung shot as this is what the bow hunter will take.
A high velocity rifle bullet will open a wound channel, this not only disrupts the heart, but also most of the other organs and blood circulation system. (massive hydraulic shock emanates from the site of impact).
The lungs are irreversibly destroyed, leading to mass bleeding in to the cavity.
This bleeding stops the heart but not brain function. With luck one shoulder has also been smashed / damaged. The deer hasn't much time as the blood pressure is dramatically dropping, the whole nerves system has taken a blow and most organs are now shutting down. You see it's only part to do with actual tissue damage of the lungs or heart.
The deer may still run, may be up to 200 yds. A slightly high shot will not matter, low will not matter, the deer is dead.
Oh, the arrow. It simply punctures the lungs or if your lucky the heart. The arrow may only penetrate 3" to 6" in to the lung cavity. Death occurs due to internal bleeding in the lung cavity. The faster the deer runs the more the blood pumps in the lungs, a little like drowning in your own blood.
If you were to be killed, which would you choose?
A rifle bullet shot in to your heart / lungs or someone pushing a pencil in to your lung?
John
sharp88 said:
If you actually understood the deer, you would know why the deer are managed.
Deer have one life limmiting factor; TOOTH WEAR.
No teeth means starvation = slow death; thats why we manage deer.
(venison also helps
)John
Toddy, you have met an archer with the ability to shoot and cleanly kill deer.
Bow hunting is much more difficult it is fair to say but nowhere near impossible.
It was banned in this country because of some numpty with a pistol crossbow who shot a duck, badly.
Responisible bowhunters lost, almost overnight, a right that dates back thousands of years.
I can't see that right being returned in these days but please lets not start an argument about it.
Bow hunting is much more difficult it is fair to say but nowhere near impossible.
It was banned in this country because of some numpty with a pistol crossbow who shot a duck, badly.
Responisible bowhunters lost, almost overnight, a right that dates back thousands of years.
I can't see that right being returned in these days but please lets not start an argument about it.
familne,
As you say...not true. But as has been pointed out, also not barbarism. I do wonder at anyone who can class everyone who hunts in a certain way as "barbarians" .
As hunter-zero has pointed out, deer need to be managed. This is due to the fact that we have eliminated all the major predators in these isles so nothing but starvation will take old, weak deer otherwise. I would also to some extent dispute hunter-zeros logicof the nature of the kill from an arrow. A properly used broadhead hunting arrow causes huge bloodloss via arterial bleeding and induces hypovolaemic shock. Personally, as a rifleman first and last, I'll stick to a rifle (oh and just to point out in response to Toddy's post that the laws in Scotland are laxer than those in England - down here a .243 delivering 1700 odd foot lbs is the minimum even on Roe). For me this is about certainty of shot placement..I'm willing to conceded that a skilled archer can despatch a deer quickly. I just know I'm not that man
Red
As you say...not true. But as has been pointed out, also not barbarism. I do wonder at anyone who can class everyone who hunts in a certain way as "barbarians"
.As hunter-zero has pointed out, deer need to be managed. This is due to the fact that we have eliminated all the major predators in these isles so nothing but starvation will take old, weak deer otherwise. I would also to some extent dispute hunter-zeros logicof the nature of the kill from an arrow. A properly used broadhead hunting arrow causes huge bloodloss via arterial bleeding and induces hypovolaemic shock. Personally, as a rifleman first and last, I'll stick to a rifle (oh and just to point out in response to Toddy's post that the laws in Scotland are laxer than those in England - down here a .243 delivering 1700 odd foot lbs is the minimum even on Roe). For me this is about certainty of shot placement..I'm willing to conceded that a skilled archer can despatch a deer quickly. I just know I'm not that man
Red
Personally I would like the opportunity to hunt deer with a bow. I have hunted with deer with riflemen, and tho there is no doubt a degree of skill and dedication involved. It is still remote killing and reasonably easy and detached.
As stated above, a skilled archer, as far as I am aware is quite capable of killing a Deer with a single arrow. This is not a target arrow, but a broad head designed for the purpose. It would certainly no be effective 1/2 a mile away across a Scottish hillside. It would be effective at close range, having studied your pray, learned its movements and stalked up on it (a feat well beyond most humans) or sitting in wait often for hours, for the creature. Surely you may see that the Archer learns more respect for the Deer ? Death does is not dealt so easily.
As I have said before I believe no meat eater should eat meat without having experienced killing, gutting, skinning and butchering a creature. Meat does not just arrive in packets. Someone has to take the life of the animal. I believe in confronting that uncomfortable truth and a rifle is still remote and detached in my eyes. It might be the easiest and most humane method, but it does not help you appreciate the life you have just ended.
I knew a Gypsy who tried to kill a Sheep with a crossbow to feed his family. He only succeeded in maiming the animal, and spent the entire night persuing it, chasing it around the field with a bolt in its neck, in-order to catch dispatch it and hide the evidence. Eventually in the hours just before dawn he arrived back at the vardo exhausted and covered in blood with the sheep across his shoulders. Never again he said and burned the crossbow the next morning
Conversely a poacher friend out with his dog, after the boxingday shoot had scarred all life from the woods. Happened across a deer, (what are the chances ) The deer took flight, as deer have evolved to do. The dog gave chase, as is the very nature of the dog, and the reason we invited him to the fire side. Hooves and paws thundered across the fields in a race to the death, a sound that echoed back to centuries past. The poacher pursued on foot as fast as he could, to where the deer had been pinned and held by the dog. He produced his knife and swiftly took the creatures life. All three had given there best. All three acted as there instincts declared. All three lived as they had for millenia. Only now bureaucracy dictates that nature is unlawful ? And Instinct must be denied. I wonder if the deer will listen ?
Rich
As stated above, a skilled archer, as far as I am aware is quite capable of killing a Deer with a single arrow. This is not a target arrow, but a broad head designed for the purpose. It would certainly no be effective 1/2 a mile away across a Scottish hillside. It would be effective at close range, having studied your pray, learned its movements and stalked up on it (a feat well beyond most humans) or sitting in wait often for hours, for the creature. Surely you may see that the Archer learns more respect for the Deer ? Death does is not dealt so easily.
As I have said before I believe no meat eater should eat meat without having experienced killing, gutting, skinning and butchering a creature. Meat does not just arrive in packets. Someone has to take the life of the animal. I believe in confronting that uncomfortable truth and a rifle is still remote and detached in my eyes. It might be the easiest and most humane method, but it does not help you appreciate the life you have just ended.
I knew a Gypsy who tried to kill a Sheep with a crossbow to feed his family. He only succeeded in maiming the animal, and spent the entire night persuing it, chasing it around the field with a bolt in its neck, in-order to catch dispatch it and hide the evidence. Eventually in the hours just before dawn he arrived back at the vardo exhausted and covered in blood with the sheep across his shoulders. Never again he said and burned the crossbow the next morning
Conversely a poacher friend out with his dog, after the boxingday shoot had scarred all life from the woods. Happened across a deer, (what are the chances
) The deer took flight, as deer have evolved to do. The dog gave chase, as is the very nature of the dog, and the reason we invited him to the fire side. Hooves and paws thundered across the fields in a race to the death, a sound that echoed back to centuries past. The poacher pursued on foot as fast as he could, to where the deer had been pinned and held by the dog. He produced his knife and swiftly took the creatures life. All three had given there best. All three acted as there instincts declared. All three lived as they had for millenia. Only now bureaucracy dictates that nature is unlawful ? And Instinct must be denied. I wonder if the deer will listen ? Rich
Rob
Need to contact Admin...
Once again I think that we need to draw a clear line between hunting and survival.
I have had conversations with people who have shot big game with a bow and arrow. In some cases, one in particular, they have cast doubts over the effectiveness of archery to cleanly dispatch a larger animal. I think that this may have been an emotional experience for some of them - as it should be. Sometimes (even with a gun) things take time to pass. If you are bowhunting then you will certainly be closer and may well witness the last few moments of the prey.
I have got kit that I am confident could cause desired effect on a red deer. I have spent a lot of hours stalking on the side of hills in Scotland - armed with no more than a camea and some bug spray. Getting close enough to take a shot with a bow (an ethical shot) is quite hard.
I would not think twice about bowhunting if I needed it for survival. I think that the difference comes about when you are no longer hunting to feed yourself / family due to actual need.
If we all lived that way, there would be less of us and more furry things to try and get in the pot.
I have had conversations with people who have shot big game with a bow and arrow. In some cases, one in particular, they have cast doubts over the effectiveness of archery to cleanly dispatch a larger animal. I think that this may have been an emotional experience for some of them - as it should be. Sometimes (even with a gun) things take time to pass. If you are bowhunting then you will certainly be closer and may well witness the last few moments of the prey.
I have got kit that I am confident could cause desired effect on a red deer. I have spent a lot of hours stalking on the side of hills in Scotland - armed with no more than a camea and some bug spray. Getting close enough to take a shot with a bow (an ethical shot) is quite hard.
I would not think twice about bowhunting if I needed it for survival. I think that the difference comes about when you are no longer hunting to feed yourself / family due to actual need.
If we all lived that way, there would be less of us and more furry things to try and get in the pot.
Hunter Zero, it sounds like you are a rifle hunter....perhaps? I do wonder what your experience has been if you think that .50 calibre is still too light to hunt with I do know that any animal if it is hit wrong will suffer and run, and it doesn't matter what you use. Power is less important than penetration and placement As many people know, its not the size of the hole, but where it is placed that matters, and what it reaches.
I personally have not killed a deer. I have spent time with bow hunters in the US, spent time practicing for a bow hunt which didn't work out due to timing, stalked deer for the fun of it here and in the US, and read as much material on bow hunting as I could get my hands on. Other than that I have merely hunted small game.
I do not feel that I am qualified to tell you exactly how far a deer will go after being hit with an arrow, or whether it suffers more or less than being hit with a bullet. However I do know that there have been reports that state that deer are often less traumatised after being shot with an arrow than by a bullet, and in many cases wander off and lie down rather than running for the far horizon. There are places within the US where bows are the prefered method of deer control, suburban areas and some army bases for instance. If they were an inefficient as some here claim, they would not be used in these locations, even in the USA.
hmmm...maybe it would be better just to agree to disagree? I doubt that anything I could say will change your mind, and nothing you say will change mine
I do know that any animal if it is hit wrong will suffer and run, and it doesn't matter what you use. Power is less important than penetration and placement As many people know, its not the size of the hole, but where it is placed that matters, and what it reaches.I personally have not killed a deer. I have spent time with bow hunters in the US, spent time practicing for a bow hunt which didn't work out due to timing, stalked deer for the fun of it here and in the US, and read as much material on bow hunting as I could get my hands on. Other than that I have merely hunted small game.
I do not feel that I am qualified to tell you exactly how far a deer will go after being hit with an arrow, or whether it suffers more or less than being hit with a bullet. However I do know that there have been reports that state that deer are often less traumatised after being shot with an arrow than by a bullet, and in many cases wander off and lie down rather than running for the far horizon. There are places within the US where bows are the prefered method of deer control, suburban areas and some army bases for instance. If they were an inefficient as some here claim, they would not be used in these locations, even in the USA.
I did qualify my comments by saying an archer needed the right gear. 3-6" indicates that someone was using the wrong gear or was no where near close enough. If that was all the penetration that a bow could give, then you would be completely correct that it would be a cruel method to hunt with, but, all the bow hunters that I know of typically get complete penetration, or even a pass through shot which can break bone and transit the chest cavity, cutting an inch+ wide channel.
hmmm...maybe it would be better just to agree to disagree? I doubt that anything I could say will change your mind, and nothing you say will change mine
I must say I'm with Chris on this one.
As a member of the British Bowhunting Association I have no issues with an ethical, properly trained and equiped bowhunter taking game as large as a red deer if not larger.
Mary has a point that the normal habitat of the the red deer in the highlands would not faciliate effective use of the bow as the highest effective range that most highly skilled bowhunters would be prepared to shoot at is sub 35 yards and a normal skilled hunter would reduce that distance by 5 to 10 yards (this is why most American & African bowhunting is done from tree stands or blinds rather than walk and stalk). To Stalk red deer on open ground to within 20-25 yards would be beyond most people so the ethical hunter would never take the shot.
As for proper equipment, the bow of choice for most bowhunters worldwide is the compound bow with a heavy broadhead arrow. The compound provides speed = flatter trajectory and the heavy arrow provides the momentum = penertrating power.
Pass throughs at 20-25 yards is not unusual from a well placed shot for even larger animals such moose and elk.
In bowhunting ethics and training are everything.
David
As a member of the British Bowhunting Association I have no issues with an ethical, properly trained and equiped bowhunter taking game as large as a red deer if not larger.
Mary has a point that the normal habitat of the the red deer in the highlands would not faciliate effective use of the bow as the highest effective range that most highly skilled bowhunters would be prepared to shoot at is sub 35 yards and a normal skilled hunter would reduce that distance by 5 to 10 yards (this is why most American & African bowhunting is done from tree stands or blinds rather than walk and stalk). To Stalk red deer on open ground to within 20-25 yards would be beyond most people so the ethical hunter would never take the shot.
As for proper equipment, the bow of choice for most bowhunters worldwide is the compound bow with a heavy broadhead arrow. The compound provides speed = flatter trajectory and the heavy arrow provides the momentum = penertrating power.
Pass throughs at 20-25 yards is not unusual from a well placed shot for even larger animals such moose and elk.
In bowhunting ethics and training are everything.
David
Similar threads
