If someone shoots at an other person, it's not due to orange laws/lack of orange laws. It's because someone not only did not verify their target and what's beyond it, they just shot a movement which is completely negligent and not an "accident". How someone can mistake a person for a deer, elk, etc is beyond me. Not only do you need to identify the movement as an animal, you must identify the species, and it the vast majority of tags, you need to identify the presence or absence of antlers, and in some cases, the number of points on the antlers. So it's just unfathomable to me that someone would say they thought that person was a spike bull elk, or a branched antler deer, etc. Could orange prevent someone from making a negligent "mistake"? Yes, possibly, but if someone shoots at someone, it's not because the victim wasn't wearing orange.
Blaze Orange and Archery
- Thread starter Chadp82
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Orange is so the DNR can see you better.This may be more proper for another area, so moderators please move if needed.
This didn't seem to gain traction but I thought it was an interesting topic in hunter safety. Blaze orange for archery was (or is) being considered for Colorado. I didn't see much after I heard of this earlier this year. There are a handful of articles that are similar and I didn't see much on this after the early part of the year.
Parks and Wildlife commission rejects blaze orange requirement for bowhunters in overlap season
A recommendation by Colorado Parks and Wildlife division staff members that would have required archery hunters to wear fluorescent orange or pink during the overlapping muzzleloader season in Septemb...www.durangoherald.com
I am curious as to what others think of this. I have personally had close encounters with game and other hunters stalking the same game during archery. I have had people with muzzleloader so close to me while I was stalking elk and it is uncomfortable. I can certainly see the pros/cons as being both an archery and firearm hunter.
Do states other than Colorado overlap seasons? This is intended to be a conversation on hunter safety and thoughts on the topic of orange and archery seasons overlap.
Discussing this with a young nephew, I was asked, if we needed the orange since we need to count points and check spread. There ya go! Out of the mouths of babes! Yep, I think I'll take him. We will still be wearing because idiots exist.
NOCO hunter
Member
For a bit of background…I am not saying any of this is right or wrong it is just how the system currently works…
In Colorado both archery and muzzleloaders are considered 'primitive weapons' and have restrictions on what you can use(no sabot and broadhead cutting diameter) Although those restrictions are loosening every year( % let off and in line)
Season dates are set by the parks and wildlife commission on 5 year cycles. There is a public process to identify items to look at every cycle(points, limited vs otc). This is where folks can have input on where the conversation goes. Right or wrong, county commissioners, outfitters, hunting organizations all try and influence what gets talked about.
In Colorado both archery and muzzleloaders are considered 'primitive weapons' and have restrictions on what you can use(no sabot and broadhead cutting diameter) Although those restrictions are loosening every year( % let off and in line)
Season dates are set by the parks and wildlife commission on 5 year cycles. There is a public process to identify items to look at every cycle(points, limited vs otc). This is where folks can have input on where the conversation goes. Right or wrong, county commissioners, outfitters, hunting organizations all try and influence what gets talked about.
I hunt all methods. I don't understand why everyone keeps talking about the ML over lap in CO. In case you forget there is a rifle bear season, coyote and sheep season at this time. Only rifle bear and ML are wearing orange. Before you throw at me their habitats don't overlap, you don't hunt where I bow hunt. I have seen sheep in the trees and sheep in elk herds and deer bedded at the base of cliffs with sheep right above them. Bear and coyotes are everywhere.
Personally I think blaze orange should be prohibited during all sessions including rifle season in order to force hunters to identity their targets. We are doing a disservice to all users of public lands by providing a crutch to our sports inherent ineptitude. I'm out all seasons whether I have a tag or not and there are many others out there off trail full camo armed with optics and cameras.
Know your target or don't shoot
Personally I think blaze orange should be prohibited during all sessions including rifle season in order to force hunters to identity their targets. We are doing a disservice to all users of public lands by providing a crutch to our sports inherent ineptitude. I'm out all seasons whether I have a tag or not and there are many others out there off trail full camo armed with optics and cameras.
Know your target or don't shoot
The last time I hunted in Idaho, orange is not required anytime
Moose Whacker
Well-Known Member
Years ago where I live archery season started two weeks before rifle season, then black powder became popular and a primitive weapons season was created. Archers and black powder shooters didn't mix well so primitive weapons hunting areas were developed, that worked well for several years.
People being people are always looking to get an edge on their competition, so in comes the inlines and the smokeless muzzleloaders equipped with scopes capable of outshooting many modern rifles. The romance of the primitive weapon has been flushed down the toilet!!!
I agree that hunters today should be mandated to wear blaze orange or pink, with today's camouflage high vis clothing it can protect not only the hunter but the shooter as well.
But and that's a big but if certain areas are open to truly primitive weapons and I mean in the true spirit of PRIMITIVE, flintlocks or percussion using traditional black powder and patch and ball or mini ball, and archers using traditional longbows or recurve, no compounds then and only then the hunter should be able to wear whatever he/she dam well wishes whether it be buckskins or high vis hat, jacket and pants.
People being people are always looking to get an edge on their competition, so in comes the inlines and the smokeless muzzleloaders equipped with scopes capable of outshooting many modern rifles. The romance of the primitive weapon has been flushed down the toilet!!!
I agree that hunters today should be mandated to wear blaze orange or pink, with today's camouflage high vis clothing it can protect not only the hunter but the shooter as well.
But and that's a big but if certain areas are open to truly primitive weapons and I mean in the true spirit of PRIMITIVE, flintlocks or percussion using traditional black powder and patch and ball or mini ball, and archers using traditional longbows or recurve, no compounds then and only then the hunter should be able to wear whatever he/she dam well wishes whether it be buckskins or high vis hat, jacket and pants.
sndmn11
Well-Known Member
This is my mind set as well. When Joe Hunter puts his orange on before he heads out, he is subconsciously training himself that anything without orange/pink is a target. In Colorado, where I am at, theast handful of hunters shot have been "sound" or "sight" shots. I believe that those hunters would not have shot of they hadn't been trained to be alert for orange/pink, and rather been trained to fully identify their target.
I also believe that those hunters were 100% comfortable breaking the law and were a coin flip away from tragedy because they demonstrated a complete disregard of antler/sex restrictions. They were willing to take the chance of shooting an illegal animal, those instances just turned out to be a person rather than an unknown elk.
The MZ hunter is guilty of manslaughter at least. You should not shoot unless you have seen your prey and identified it as your prey. No excuses. There are still instances, even local to me, where brush pickers are wearing black rain gear during hunting season and get shot because a hunter heard noise in brush and shot in there because he saw black and "thought" it was a bear. Hunter still guilty of at least being an idiot and manslaughter. Where I live MZ and archery hunters are not required to wear orange except in a couple instances of overlapping seasons with modern rifle. If hunters would ID there targets we wouldn't need to wear orange or pink. Used to be red or yellow or orange when I started hunting and it was a suggestion not a low. I have not experienced any situation where I needed to worry about shooting at an animal and hitting somebody beyond my target, always it seems the bullet hits the ground a few feet after passing through an animal or it stays inside the body. I've never shot an animal on a flat or skylighted, those being instances of the bullet may pass through and strike some unknown person in the distance. I have heard of ricochets that hit a hunter in the distance.
tony d willIiams
Well-Known Member
I agree with you. Dad, mom, a few of their friends and I used to go bird hunting. I saw a group at a distance watching us, and other hunters with binoculars. Young eyes are great eyes.
When any of the groups they were watching came near the end of a field or toward a road, they would quickly position themselves to shoot the birds we had been herding. They also placed themselves so we were not able to shoot as they were in the direction we would be shooting. Using other hunters as beaters.
Where I hunt for medium to large game, I am so far away from the standard places others hunt that I rarely hear a report.
Edit: Back then the hunter requirement to wear orange was not "the law". We all paid attention, and knew what we were looking at, tracking, and preparing to shoot.
I would like for all those with guns to be safe, and verify before raising their guns.
I do not know if wearing orange or pink saves people from being shot.
I do know that disarming law abiding citizens ensures they are less safe.
Last edited:
JustMe2
Well-Known Member
I agree we should use inaccurate weapons like flintlocks, long bows, etc. that most hunters can't shoot straight because they don't practice, so our game suffers the most. These weapons also allow a hunter to shoot more times before actually making a lethal hit, therefore, the hunter gets to shoot more and have more fun. Modern improvements makes hunting more ethical except for those who think they can shoot long distance without practicing or understanding their rifle's capabilities. I think flintlocks, long bows, and recurve bows should be banned for unethically making animals suffer from bad shots.
Great point on the overlaps. I knew of this having hunted sheep a couple years ago, but didn't consider it when I started the conversation.
Flatbow
Well-Known Member
Just because you can't shoot primitive weapons well enough to hunt ethically with does not mean no one can.
Practice, know your limits and they are no different than modern equipment other than the extra effort and woodsmanship skills it takes to close the distance.
The way a close weapons hunt should be.
