  PBS National Anti-Crossbow Committee While the Professional Bowhunters Society recognizes the rights of hunters to choose other weapons in separate seasons, the crossbow is not considered a bow by definition or technological standard. The crossbow should thus not be allowed in archery only seasons. The PBS National Anti-Crossbow Committee stands in the forefront with other hunter groups and organizations to.... » Educate bowhunters, legislators, and game agencies to the detrimental impact crossbows present to archery-only hunting seasons. » Protect the intent and challenge of hunting with archery equipment in archery only seasons. » Promote fair-chase to the game we pursue. Adaptive equipment is available to allow youth, women, and the physically challenged enjoy the challenging "walk in the woods" that those before us intended archery season to be. PBS's position regarding the crossbow was developed with input from our membership, and accepted as PBS position, only after the membership voted to accept it as such. !!! RED ALERT !!! There are crossbow bills in Texas, South Carolina, New Jersey, Minnesota, and Illinois. They include the same issues of old, physically challenged, women, and youth. Ever noticed in their advertising there is no "poster" child of the above. One thing that is now different is that game agencies are lacking funding and turning to industry to bail them out by sneaking the crossbow through the back door and into archery seasons or signing Memorandums Of Understanding. Both avenues are touted as just wanting to expand archery. Hmmm, do you think they may ask for a favor for their helping out? Some game agencies are selling out our public trust. They manage wildlife and wildlife should not be a money maker for private industry. They are selling out our natural resource to private industry and not involving the conservationist - the hunters! Jim Posewitz said it best in one of his books "commercial interests should not be given privilege when hunting opportunities are allocated." If the different implement seasons were created to let each group have a separate season based on the efficiency of the weapon, then why let a hybrid implement (crossbow) into an archery only season? Hybrid you say? Not my term but one from a member of the Archery Trade Association (ATA). They certainly realize that the crossbow is not a bow, but still some ATA members want it in archery only seasons. I have to agree that it is not a firearm either as I don't hear the "bang" but it really looks and shoots like one. My state, New York, says they will not introduce a crossbow into archery seasons if it would cause conflicts between hunters, but they are trying. Some agencies are saying that that have large herds and need to get them under control. Some states probably do. If you had this problem wouldn't you use the most effective tool a firearm which harvests far more animals? In Ohio there are more crossbow hunters than real bowhunters. Who has the voice for bowhunters in that state now? Urban deer control is another hot topic that crossbow proponents discuss using the crossbow for. Why? Conventional bow users have had a success rate from 38% to over 150% depending on the area. They have been successful in reducing urban deer. The real issue in some of these urban areas is access, not weapon. Then came the gadgeteer, otherwise known as the sporting-goods dealer. He has draped the American outdoorsman with an infinity of contraptions, all offered as aids to self-reliance, hardihood, woodcraft, or marksmanship, but too often functioning as substitutes for them. Gadgets fill the pockets, they dangle from neck and belt. The overflow fills the auto-truck, and also the trailer. Each item of outdoor equipment grows lighter and often better, but the aggregate poundage becomes tonnage. The traffic in gadgets adds up to astronomical sums, which are soberly published as representing "the economic value of wildlife." But what of cultural values? - Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac Mark L. Scott PBS Anti-Crossbow Chair |