For some reason that I always found odd, the Pope and Young Club never allowed animals killed with an arrow with a lighted nock to be entered into their archery record book. The thinking was that a lighted nock somehow gave the hunter an “unfair electronic advantage” over the deer. How, by maybe helping a hunter to make a better and more lethal shot in low legal shooting light?
To my mind, a lighted nock can help a hunter to know more precisely where he or she hit a deer, and in many cases that helps in the recovery of that animal. All good.
Well, P&Y has finally come into the 21st century of archery hunting. Beginning August 1, 2014, the club is okay with lighted nocks. This is the best part: The statue change is retroactive, meaning that game previously killed with lighted-nock arrows, as well as animals shot from this point forward, will now be eligible for the records provided they meet all other conditions/criteria.
So if a lighted nock precluded you from entering a P&Y buck in the book before, submit a new application to the club if you want to.
BTW, I saw that this change in bylaws passed the voting membership by a vote of 75% Yes to 25% No. How about that 25%… There is still a narrow-minded minority of old hunters in the bowhunting world who is basically against all technology and change; if these people had their way, all we would ever use to kill a deer would be a recurve or a longbow and wooden arrows…maybe a spear.
I grew up hunting deer with a recurve. Some of my best hunting buddies are traditional hunters, and I have great respect for that. But it is way past time we stopped bickering about little stuff like lighted nocks (and bigger stuff like crossbows). The technology is here to stay and grow, and that’s for the betterment of bowhunting because it gets (and keeps) more people in the woods, and helps us all to hunt and shoot better, and ultimately recover more animals.
This nock change is a step in the right direction.
Who cares about P&Y. Much ado about nothing in my opinion. Just measure the total gross if you want to. I don’t need my name on a “List”.Up until recently, I believe that many of the record book animals were as much luck as genuine skill. Of late with info and educational articles, like we see here, those skills and knowlege were not nearly as widespread as now. Blogs like these have helped me keep up with the latest info. and the threads posted by our professors on latest findings are absolutely changing our sport and verify past studies as well as our own wods sense. CAn’t wait till Sept. opener. My bloods already up.
Ok, makes sence
Does P&Y still have a rule on how much let-off your compound can have? Like no more than 60-65%. I always thought that was another one that needs looked at. If its true
I believe they changed that several years ago to 80% let off.
jjas cameras are a touchy subject. They’ve been out for what like 10 years now and I still have never owned a trail camera because when I’m hunting and I see a buck that makes me go Whoa Shooter I pull the trigger. I don’t want to lose that excitement and think oh but drop tine Freddy is still out there so I’m going to pass on this buck that I would have shot otherwise.
For arguments sake though lets dive deeper into this with 2 scenarios.
Scenario #1 A hunter goes out into the woods gets into his climber and climbs 30 feet up his tree during the dark of early morning. Boom he gets a text that there is a big buck coming right towards him, what changes? He’s still going to be sitting where he was already going to kill this buck and this buck is going to still go about his normal routine right pass this hunter. So what has the hunter done wrong?
Scenario #2 A guy goes out to his land and sits in his truck, waits for one of his 15 real time cameras to alert him where the buck he is hunting is at. He then pursues this buck all the while keeping track of him with photos from these high end cameras. He walks over to where the buck is headed cuts him off and shoots him.
Hunter in scenario #1 hasn’t done anything wrong and killed this buck the same way a guy would have 15 years ago, the only difference is he had a heads up the buck was coming from his camera. However the camera didn’t change the way his hunt would have went down.
Hunter in scenario #2 has basically relied solely the technology of this camera for his hunt and completely relied on the technology to harvest his buck. Without it he would have not had a chance at where the buck was going at all. This is a sad way to hunt but now possible.
In my opinion the hunter from scenario #1 should still be allowed into the books because he still hunted ethically and didn’t “Cheat” as you may want to call it. The guy in scenario 2 should not be allowed into the books because he didn’t put any real effort into this and he basically had the cameras tell him exactly where to go to kill his deer. Like I said earlier I have mixed emotions about them even though I don’t use cameras, it makes for a great debate. They have their place in hunting and sadly pretty soon when the price of real time cameras comes down and average Joe can afford them it will change the way that 80% of our country hunts whether people admit it or not. It would be damn near impossible to fight the urge to not get up and move to go shoot a 180″ buck if you knew exactly where he was at and headed to.
Maverick quote “It would be damn near impossible to fight the urge to not get up and move to go shoot a 180″ buck if you knew exactly where he was at and headed to”
That’s true and part of the reason I’m not a fan of “in season” use of cameras, especially “real time” cameras.
At what point does camera use turn deer hunting in deer shopping?
With all due respect I have to disagree. I have no problem with cameras being used during the off season to monitor herds and take an inventory of what is there, but come deer season, I think they should be taken out of the woods.
Cameras (and especially real time cameras), can provide an unfair advantage to the hunter and put them on deer they otherwise likely wouldn’t have seen.
I wondered the same thing about these new cameras that send you real time photos of bucks passing them. It’s a huge advantage yes, but at the same time the world evolves and so will hunting so this is where it has brought us. Should a hunter be penalized for using the best technology available? I have mixed emotions about it, but I also feel like if the hunter is so invested in his deer herd that he monitors them daily with real time information that he deserves to be in the books if he kills a monster after so much time, energy, and money spent towards getting that buck.
Well how about that. I guess there is a little flexibility in the “judges at P and Y. Not that it matters much to me. I don’t hunt for the score though I do have some that would qualify. Just not that important to me but for those that it matters too, the change makes sense.
I had emailed P&Y and received this message….
No problem with a trail camera as long as the camera doesn’t transmit an image to a computer or cell phone. If you need to go out to the camera and retrieve the card or photo it can be used.
Thanks,
———————————————–
Glenn Hisey
Director of Records
Pope and Young Club
I agree this is a good change but I do have a question. I went to P&Y’s website and under their rules of fair chase found this list….
The term “Fair Chase” shall not include the taking of animals under the following conditions:
Helpless in a trap, deep snow or water, or on ice.
From any power vehicle or power boat.
By “jacklighting” or shining at night.
By the use of any tranquilizers or poisons.
While inside escape-proof fenced enclosures.
By the use of any power vehicle or power boats for herding or driving animals, including use of aircraft to land alongside or to communicate with or direct a hunter on the ground.
By the use of electronic devices for attracting, locating or pursuing game or guiding the hunter to such game, or by the use of a bow or arrow to which any electronic device is attached.
Any other condition considered by the Board of Directors as unacceptable.
This rule is the one I have a question about…….
By the use of electronic devices for attracting, locating or pursuing game or guiding the hunter to such game, or by the use of a bow or arrow to which any electronic device is attached.
Do game cameras fall under this heading? Especially the newer cameras that notify hunters in real time? Just curious.
As you probably know, Mike, they weren’t just picking on lighted nocks. The prohibition against electronic devices on the bow or arrow was a longstanding rule that required a special exemption for lighted nocks. I think this would have happened before now if it didn’t require a fundamental change in that longstanding rule. If I had to guess I’d say that many in that 25% aren’t so opposed to the nocks but rather opening that door to who knows what in the future.
I didn’t realize it was retroactive. I guess a lot of TV hunters will be entering deer this year.