Anyone read the article on hunting with wood arrows in the latest TBM? First time in 30 years I've read anything like that. He says his point is to get us to be sure of our shot and not make a wounding shot. Thought that is what we do anyway.

Yes, and it was mentioned somewhat in the book by Kieth Schuyler called: Archery Golds to Big Game. Book was published in 1970.

I didn't take it that way. I read it more like he was helping hunters to be aware of the materials we use and potential problems that could occur with a poorly placed shot.

In general, I like to give hunters the benefit of the doubt so of course we all take the best shot we can; Of course we don't want to wound and animal. And of course we all want to understand what happens if the unfortunate happens and we do wound an animal.

I thought it was an informative article and made me think about my chosen arrow material in a different way.

Regards,

I read it.....and then I reread it the next day. The next day I came to the conclusion that yahooty came to. He is not dissing wood arrows, he is trying to get people think about their shots in the woods and arrow placement. He likely is not wrong about subsequent infections, but that doesn't matter if you make a good shot.

Personally i think the premise is flawed. A carbon arrow splintering in muscle has similar, if not more, potential to remain in an animal and cause infection than wood. So mow we all have to use aluminum to be ethical? Everyone makes a bad shot eventually.

And not all bad shots will cause infection with any material. The article won't change anything and is not the only one regarding wood arrows. Us old farts have seen these discussions in the raw back in the early 60's, and they were much more hateful toward wood arrows. Still, every year lots of animals are taken with wood arrows...and carbon with little ado about it. I would be more concerned about things like Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD), and Epizootic hemorrhagic disease (EHD), than any amount of trace arrow material and its outcome.

Excellent point George.

Guess I'd have to see the article, but no place around here carries it....

Aluminum definitely is the least likely to leave a foreign body behind, but JMO the potential for infection is probably higher with carbon, if one should break off. One thing I noticed on my last deer, when the shaft did not sail clear through - that little doe went BANANAS trying to get rid of that thing that had grabbed on to her back.

Lucky for me she was bucking, crow-hopping, sunfishing and finally flopping down hard on her back without leaving the area and I was able to get in another shot. Had she bolted, I may not have been able to track her down with a high, single lung hit and fast-failing daylight. Would depend on how long the blood held up; there was enough to follow as she moved off at a slow trot and then at a walk.

Wood or aluminum would've snapped off a lot quicker, and light blood is easier to follow with a slower-moving dispenser ;)

And, any Arrow material has the potential to leave a feather or vane behind even on a pass through.

If TBM can't be found in your area, an online subscription is available for $10/ yr. MP

Like George said this is nothing new. In Ohio in the early 70"s they went so far as to try and make wood arrows unlawful. Saying how wood left in a deer rots and causes certain slow painful death. I didn't read the article but just do your best. It's all you can do.

One thing I like about wood is that with the lack of easy availability of pulltruded carbon shafts, wood is one of the only monolithic materials we have for making fully bonded "single piece" arrows. The glue on head is a prerequisite for any hunting arrow I use, and as nice a system as rps is for allowing 2 season hunters to make a minimal investment in their gear, it is a joke for any serious uses.

Wood meant cedar for a long time, which is awesome. And when I started it also mean that barrel of lessor cheap arrows that might explode on the shot, along with quality shafts from say Rose City. But there are far stronger wooden arrows out there, that cut their teeth on armour. There is far greater variety in wooden arrows than there is in the carbon, or Al, markets where virtually every product is chasing the same tube arrow part timer. Carbon could be the solution to every need, but the truth is most people want to pay Walmart prices. Well probably blem, closeout, or Discount Arrow prices to be honest, rocks being what they are. These choices more than get the job done, but it isn't as though the ultimate arrow shaft is under discussion here either.

My favorite arrow shaft is hickory. Iv'e seen it bounce off things. I kinda doubt it's going to shatter in a game animal.

Seems Graphflex arrows really started the discussion about arrows splintering and causing issues. I think the first carbons had to pass muster to get over the Graphflex history. Maybe George can fix my history/memory on this?

I use cedar, aluminum, and carbon arrows. Have no preference just use what tunes best in a particular bow. My question is, has anyone had a carbon splinter in an animal? My only experience with a carbon breaking in a deer, the arrow broke off clean, like it had been sawn off. MP

I remember when the early carbon arrows were taken off the market..

chris

I think a lot of it was just push back from Easton. At some point it was realized that the linear or 0-90 fiber orientation which seems the most logical to maximize performance is actually overkill in that direction, so they worked with more 45-45 layers and emphasized a lightish arrow with very high impact capabilities. That has been a winner in hunting.

By the way, I am not dissing Easton. The logical fiber orientation any engineer would have tried might very well have turned out badly. It had in a number of other products at the time. Maybe their data showed them what they reported. The arrows we ended up with are a big drop in technical qualities from what we had with Easton Al, and later Easton carbon, but it hasn't mattered because hunting is in the range of a 40 minute of angle proposition. And another factor with compounds is that spine can be almost ignored with the rigs that were coming into play around the same time. It would be a major step forward in technology if we could have hand fired sticks that didn't care about arrow spine. That is one of the Holly Grails.

A wooden arrow that doesn't pass through will almost certainly either pull out or break off, but that doesn't cause the kind of significant wood splintering described in the article. I've never seen an arrow do that in an animal, and I can't work up too much concern about it.

I have seen two instances of a carbon arrow waiving from a deer's backside, apparently permanently embedded. I would think that should be more of a problem to worry about.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here