Our state has an early archery and muzzleloader deer season. I've tried to persuade them to include handguns on the grounds that the skill level required is in the same class with primitive weapons, but no go.

Anyhow, I've never been involved with archery, but I would assume there have to be significant similarities in degree of difficulty. How do you guys rate the comparison?

Archery is harder. Handgun is more forgiving, both in shot placement (though not by much), and distance to game needed for a good shot.I'm comfortable with my bow out to 40 yds or so. I would take shots twice that far with my revolver and still feel great.I would also not hesitate to shoot a deer head on, in the chest, or right through the shoulder with my revolver. I wouldn't attempt either of those with my bow.

I also think a "pistol season" might tend to draw every Tom, Dick, and Bubba with a .38 special out into the woods, which is a great thing about our country, but maybe not so great for the deer herds. Bowhunters do practice, generally, and most anyone can shoot their bow in the backyard. Not sure that would translate to the handgunners. I think handgun hunting is great, but I'd hate to start seeing a bunch of deer being crippled by bad shots.

Now go ahead and let me have it.

i agree bow is harder.

Archery with modern equipment - wheels, sights, and release - is more difficult than handgun hunting; your effective range is about 25 yards, or about half that of a well-prepared handgun hunter. Of course traditional "stick and string" archery is even harder; I gave it up because the deer deserved a hunter who practiced more than I could afford to. You didn't ask, but but in my personal experience hunting with a roundball flintlock long gun and hunting with an iron-sighted cartridge handgun are about an equal challenge. $0.02

Archery is definitely harder IMO......

Archery is harder. I shoot barebow recurve and longbow. The coolest thing about archery is that you can practice in your own back yard without hearing protection....

Being able to shoot with the wife and kids and not have to yell to converse is just about perfect. Perfect family shooting activity imho...unless we are using the blowguns.....

Good points from everybody especially on the distances and shot placement. I hadn't thought of what part of the deer as target because I don't get too many chances at head-on shots and usually avoid shoulder shots for meat damage reasons. The neck I do like however...clean miss or clean kill.

On the danger of the early season bringing out the bubbas with .38 specials, that's always a possibility but I don't really see it as likely. The reason is almost nobody locally is using handguns as primary deer weapons. I see it either being ignored or bringing out the modern high power scoped handguns and the better type of hunters who are looking for more challenge.

The flintlock comparison was interesting. Fact is, I used to be a muzzleloader. My favorite was the TC Hawken .50 with target sights and maxi-balls. I molded my own. I also shot a Parker-Hale .577 and rolled my own for that. If I'm comparing them to handguns I really used to find the muzzleloader easier to hold steady simply because of the physical properties of being a rifle (or with the .577, a musket).

Anyway, I think I'm gathering here that the physical process of triggering the arrow in archery is more demanding than pulling the trigger on a handgun and that a bow is harder to hold steady across the board than a handgun. Is that about the size of it, regardless of the other variables, such as target distance, whether off-hand standing or sitting, whether target is moving, or size of target area etc?

If so I guess I'll have to use a different tact in trying to convince them to allow handguns in the early season..

Good thread

Reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend back 20 years ago.

He hated handgun hunting because his opinion (every tom, dick and harry was out there with a weppon they wern't proficent with.)

I made the argument that he was a dedicated bow hunter and that was harder yet. He belives that bow hunters know the're challenged and prepare with practis for the hunt But that guys with a handgun just assume it will preform like a rifle.

After a lot of handgun kills since that conversation and very few archery kills I will agree that the handgun has the advantage but not to the point where most handgun hunters are complacent about the need to become proficent.

I shoot my bows a lot and with my most advanced (accurate and powefull) bow I would take a shot out to maybe 70 yards (60 for sure).

I have taken big game at 154 yards ( lazer range finder) with a handgun.

An open sighted revolver is a differant story just as a long/recurve bow is. I have taken deer at 60 yds. with a revolver (pritty much max IMO) My longest kill with a longbow was 30yds again for me max).

Being a bow hunter as well as a handgun hunter, bow hunting is not harder, it is more challenging. Here is why I say it that way. With a bow you have to wait for the perfect shot, and be at the right distance. Shot place meant is more critical with a bow. Double lung is what you want every time. With a handgun, you can make a straight on shot, quartering away, quartering to and a broadside shot and get the game.

The real key here is, putting in the time to become as proficient as one can be, and stay within your limitations.

Good answers, but I do have a bone to pick with Shack's take on "neck shots". As a taxidermist, hunter ed instructor, and hunter, the neck shot is one of the most irresponsible shots out there. Contrary to popular belief that "clean hit or clean miss" is the farthest from the truth. Unless you sever a pencil thin jugular vein or break the spinal column, the deer will go off and die a lingering death. I've seen deer with esophogus shot open and they'd tried to eat only to have the food and mouth acids leak out through the neck with horrible looking infections. I've found them with gaping trachea holes where they'd tried to labor through breathing only to have debris sucked into their lungs and suffocate them. Even head shots can be horrible. I've seen deer with slug holes through their muzzle and bottom jaws shot off that were killed later in the day or hunt by other hunters. Neck and head shots are just showboating and should be avoided at all costs IN MY OPINION.

About neck shots, first, I can say I've never lost a deer in about 40 yrs of hunting them. I have missed shots (on a couple I was relieved to find it wasn't just me.. on one the scope was loose and another a broken off twig hinted at a deflection). I also can honestly say on ones where I fired more than once, I never found more than one hole. That means I don't think I've ever put one in a non-fatal place. And I've never hit one and then lost it or even had to follow up a blood trail at least beyond a few yards.

But I have made a number of neck shots and they resulted in the deer's instant death. In fact I can think of only one exception. That was with a .44 Magnum and the deer dropped immediately and did not get up. The bullet grazed and opened the middle lower portion of the neck. He had continued movement for about 20 seconds, but another shot wasn't needed. Other neck shots have been from various angles. I've seen them drop so fast from neck shots that they literally disappear before the gun barrel on a .30-06 lowers back from recoil. On one, a frontal neck shot, the deer dropped so instantly that I came real close to accidentally shooting a second deer that was standing right behind the first because I thought it was the same animal. I'm glad I didn't..you couldn't shoot two in one morning then.

I have found a number of deer that wandered from a long way off unto the farm after being wounded by being shot in the body by other hunters. On one the deer went about half a mile with the chest cavity completely opened. You could see the heart still beating. I think a neck shot would have been preferable to that. And it certainly would have been better than some of the shootings I've found that other hunters have done on deer that were still alive (one was a 12 pt some hero shot in the rump..unfortunately I had only a 12 ga with birdshot that day and couldn't get close enough to finish him).

I have never tried to do head shots and have never shot a deer in such places as jaw, muzzle, nose or wherever. No one hunting at our place has either to my knowledge. If they did they wouldn't get invited back (there have been those who got themselves kicked off, but it was for other reasons).

So I respectfully disagree about the effectiveness of a reasonably placed bullet thru the neck from a high power rifle or .44 Magnum handgun. And there are times it's the only shot available.

Now, a neck shot if someone's doing a head mount is another matter. But then I keep only the meat and sometimes the antlers.

Hunting with a bow is definately harder IMHO.

I think hunting with a handgun is harder than hunting with a muzzle loader.

I have done all 3.

handgun can be comparable; if you limit it to 2" barreled hammerless snubbies. Anything more sophisticated; no contest! A top line compound might get 325fps with a real hunting arrow and broadhead, tops. A 16" barreled contender in 325 WSM...?

Rich
JMHO, and I have also hunted with all three. My best Mule Deer to date was in 1982 with an XP-100 in 35 Remington.

Shack, it's OK to disagree, but I notice even you said you don't THINK you've ever hit one and didn't retrieve it. How could you ever be sure? I know deer anatomy and I know what I've seen with guys like you who swear by it. Why limit the size of your target like that to begin with? What purpose does it serve other than boost your ego? I hate getting those animals in my shop as they oftentimes have the hair slip or have repairs that can't be hidden when you do get lucky. I figure if I can't shoot well enough to put a bullet through the boiler room and not WORRY about missing, I need to stop hunting anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by george roof:
Shack, it's OK to disagree, but I notice even you said you don't THINK you've ever hit one and didn't retrieve it. How could you ever be sure? I know deer anatomy and I know what I've seen with guys like you who swear by it. Why limit the size of your target like that to begin with? What purpose does it serve other than boost your ego? I hate getting those animals in my shop as they oftentimes have the hair slip or have repairs that can't be hidden when you do get lucky. I figure if I can't shoot well enough to put a bullet through the boiler room and not WORRY about missing, I need to stop hunting anyway.

George,I have to dissagree with you on head,neck shots.I have worked in Deer culling around Cities and Suburban Neighborhoods.The one thing the people who hired us did not want was a wounded Deer running through peoples yards.I used a 22 Hornet with I am guessing 85% head shots and the rest neck shots.Never had one move after being shot.I used 40 gr, ballisic tips.The Deer were shot at night in January over a Bait pile 25 yds away.All deer had to be recovered and processed.Not much fun.

Ol Biker, guess I have to eat a bit of crow in that context. I have been on hunts like that as well, and LIKE YOU had one shot kills to the punkin. HOWEVER, the deer were shot at night with lights and they froze while we shot. We had silencers and could drop more than one at one setting. We never considered "if I hit, I hit" or "if I miss, I miss completely" as most shot were less than 100 yards (many less than 25). I thought it would be exciting when I started but after one night I found that "hunting" wasn't a word to be used in defining what we were doing.

Neck shots are pretty unreliable, IMO for MOST people -- you can take the average hunter, and tell him to put his round through the shoulder. If they listen, and they're remotely proficient w. a rifle, they should be able to reliably "down" the animal.

Head shots, again, can be reliable, and where growing up -- again, at less than 50 yds, and used by people experienced w. both the rifle and the animals being hunted.

As for archery v. handgun... I personally never hunted w. a bow, as I never felt myself to be reliable enough w. them, but, in the hands of a skilled man, at a known range, an archer achieves a level of accuracy that most handgun shooters only dream of.

The handgun is easier but a good archer is deadly too. Just different conditions. Limit distance and where the arrow is placed will do the job.
I just came back with a doe I shot this afternoon with my bow. This one puts me over 230 some deer with the bow, lost count long ago.
I feel the biggest difference is in how a deer will effect you with each form of hunting. It is easier to get rattled with a bow because the deer is close.
Long ago when I shot target archery there were some super shots. I never remember any of them ever killing a deer. They always came home empty after hunting a week. Back then the average time it took an archer to kill a deer was 15 years.
In that week I would have two deer and would get another before gun season. We were only allowed one deer so I would get one in PA, one in Ohio and one in MI.
I remember the beating heart and the shakes but when I put pressure on the string, it all went away.
You must gain control over your body and mind so you can make the shot. The closer the animal is, the more control you need.
I have a friend that misses deer by at least 10' with his revolver but can punch the center out of a target. Don't ask me what he does with a bow!

The thread got a little side tracked on neck shots, but before getting back on track, this...I don't go out looking for neck shots...it's for times when it's the best or only available. My usual deer shot is the heart/lung. I also do neck shots with a scoped .30-06, and not with the handgun for all the obvious reasons. I am however convinced by experience in the field that I've got no problem being able to properly place it when needed and haven't seen anything to complain about on the results.

Now, assume we're talking standing off-hand and a slowly moving 20 yd target. Looking at just the shooting mechanics and aside from where to hit the deer, does the process of aiming, drawing the bow and releasing the arrow seem more demanding than aiming an iron sights handgun and squeezing the trigger? Is the bow just a lot more difficult to hold steady than a handgun without a rest? I think I'm seeing that the answer's yes, but like I said I've never tried it.

The archer does of course miss out on the distraction of muzzle blast, noise and recoil. We here have trained ourselves to ignore those however..

I have no where near the experience that BFRShooter does, but I have taken several deer with a bow and one with an open sighted single action 357 revolver.
Back when I practiced every week with my bow I could keep all my shots on a small paper plate out to 80 yards. On an early archery Elk hunt I was in a ground blind and a cow Elk was comeing up a trail and stopped just beyond a couple of trees. I guessed the trees to be 40 yards and put my 40 yd pin right behind the shoulder and released. The arrow flew clean and true in the exact direction I wanted it to go. She startled and ran when the fletching thumped the bottom of her chest. It was a just barely clean miss. I paced off 41 yds to the trees, but her tracks were 6yds beyond that.
I was shooting a very fast compound at 65lbs, but my heavy arrows were only going around 240fps.
I think that accurate range estimation is the hardest part of achery. My longest shot on a deer was 53 yards and was a perfect double lung.
The Deer I shot with the pistol was about 80-85 yds. I put the bullet right behind the shoulder, it took out both lungs and ended up in the off side shoulder. There is no way I would have taken that 80 yd shot with a bow.

Idaho has some short range weapon only areas where you can use a bow, muzzle loader or shotgun. I have asked that they consider adding pistols to that list as the bullet weight, caliber, velocity and trajectory are very similar to some muzzle loaders. I suggested that they could limit it to straight walled pistol cartridges.
Maybe I'll have to keep submitting my suggestion a couple times a year and get lots of guys to sign it.

Great point about range estimation. That is the key.
A bow at full draw is easier to hold on target then a pistol---MUCH easier because of the tension in your muscles.
At normal bow range, the bow can be easier to hit with. But you need to know the exact distance.
The new, fast bows shoot flat but kill very poorly because the arrows are too light and do not penetrate for beans.
I refuse to use light, fast arrows so I need a better estimation of distance.
My arrows will go through anything on a deer from end to end or solid bone.
There is no excuse for sticking an arrow 3" into any animal. A longbow at 180 fps will shoot the right arrow through a deer but the new bows at 320 fps suck with the toothpicks being shot. All so range estimation is not needed. Lazy hunters that want one pin to 30 yards.

Having shot both bows and handguns for over 40 years handguns are easier then bows. Mostly because of less movement needed to get on game at really close ranges. Then with the better handguns ones out ranges a bow.

Bfrshooter I guess I should worry about my carbon arrows expandable 100 gr broad heads. heck the last few deer I shot with them I had no trouble driving them through the deer and 18 inchs into the ground on the others side.

The last one with a Matthews blk max 80lbs with carbon arrows expandable broad heads Right through the deer the arrow sticking into the ground on the far side. Never had a bit of trouble driving carbon arrows and expandable broad heads through deer.

I sure do like the one pin out to 30. Matter of fact most likely tomorrrow evening I will go
Kill another one with it. Started deer hunting with a long bow then a bear magnum recurve brought my first compound in 75 and never thought of going back to the old ones.

Lazy no just smart.

bfr, where did you come up with that "light arrow" statement. My 70 pound Mathews Switchback XT will poke the heaviest arrow you can find though most North American game when shot placement is true. Now I have seen the Nimrod women on the Outdoor Channel shooting those 30-40 pound bows at deer at 50-60 yards and the deer run off with the arrow sticking up like a car radio antennae, but thats now what I get.

quote:

Originally posted by george roof:
bfr, where did you come up with that "light arrow" statement. My 70 pound Mathews Switchback XT will poke the heaviest arrow you can find though most North American game when shot placement is true. Now I have seen the Nimrod women on the Outdoor Channel shooting those 30-40 pound bows at deer at 50-60 yards and the deer run off with the arrow sticking up like a car radio antennae, but thats now what I get.

I am going to interpret his statement as a light arrow doesn't carry the momentum of a heavy arrow -- kinda like light versus heavy bullets.......

I shoot light carbon arrows in my Matthews bow. All the deer I have shot, the arrows have done complete pass through out to 30 yards. Shot placement.

A lot of time when you see an arrow stick out of an animal, it does not give you the true penetration of the arrow. The arrow backs out as the animal runs off, I have seen this with heavy arrows as well as light arrows. When a shot is made and the arrow goes in behind the front shoulder and angles toward the opposite leg and hits bone, the arrow stops and can back out. Some times it will stick into the bone and that is where you see the arrow back out, but it is also broke off inside the animal. But the arrow has passed through both lungs and the animal is found rather quickly.

So just because an arrow does not pass through, does not mean it did not work right. It is not the arrow that kill, it is the broadhead that does the damage. If you don't think you get good penetration, take an arrow and have someone stand on a 3 foot ladder and just drop it into you hand from 6 feet and see how far the arrow penetrates your hand with a light arrow and broadhead at a very slow fps.

An arrow is like a revolver boolit in that it needs two holes for the best blood trail.
The new bows are fantastic but choice of an arrow is still important. I now see they are making carbon arrows heavier but look at the trouble you will have if you go to Africa or somewhere else for really big game. You need to meet arrow weight rules. Even Howard Hill had to put one shaft inside another to get the weight needed for penetration.
My arrows not only go through any animal but if they hit the leg on the other side, it just cuts the leg off. My arrows weigh 651.5 gr. I use one pin from zero to 20 yards because the heavy arrow is going 238 fps.
The worst hit I made was when a deer ducked and set back so I hit the shoulder blade. It went through the shoulder, spine and cut the ball joint in half on the opposite shoulder. It went to the vanes on nothing but solid bone, knocked the deer over and when the arrow stuck in the ground, the deer slid down the shaft.
Then a guy comes here with arrows that weigh 300 and some gr but he brags about speed. Guess what, hit the shoulder or a big bone going in and the arrow just stops right there---lost deer.
Don't start the "shot placement" stuff like you do with small caliber revolvers, you do NOT know what an animal will do when you release an arrow.
I watched a hunting show the other night and they showed the guy drawing his bow--he struggled. Then slow motion to the deer. He got 3" behind the front leg into the heart, NO BONES HIT. The entire arrow was hanging out the side of the deer as it ran, do NOT tell me the arrow worked out. He used a Rage broadhead or some expandable. WHY, because the fast bows and light arrows can't be tuned with a good broadhead.
All of you that think speed is more important will eventually lose too many animals and smarten up like us revolver shooters.
Light arrows and fast bows were made for the 3D shooters that can't judge distance the same as the great Vaquero was changed for the pimp loads the cowboy shooters use.
Take the great bows made today and turn them into a proper hunting tool with the proper arrow.
I can't even buy good arrows anymore and hope mine will last until I can no longer pull a bow.

I have hunted with most everything myself and guided a lot of hunters as well on big and dangerous game. Archery is more difficult, there are so many more things that can go wrong and there is no fast follow up shot.
Most compound shooters get very hung up on the fps thing. EVERYTIME I ask a compound guy about his hunting experience with a particular bow, he tells me EXACTLY how fast it shoots! All else being equal, HEAVY arrows do penetrate better than light ones. I agree if you are shootng deer with an 80# bow, then it dosn't make much difference, but if you start sticking arrows into cape or water buffalo and want to actually kill them and not just piss them off, I would take a 1000 grain arrow over even a 700 grain one EVERYTIME!

Bfrshooter, good post. Maybe there's a market there for heavy arrows if someone wanted to start a small business.

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:
An arrow is like a revolver boolit in that it needs two holes for the best blood trail.
The new bows are fantastic but choice of an arrow is still important. I now see they are making carbon arrows heavier but look at the trouble you will have if you go to Africa or somewhere else for really big game. You need to meet arrow weight rules. Even Howard Hill had to put one shaft inside another to get the weight needed for penetration.
My arrows not only go through any animal but if they hit the leg on the other side, it just cuts the leg off. My arrows weigh 651.5 gr. I use one pin from zero to 20 yards because the heavy arrow is going 238 fps.
The worst hit I made was when a deer ducked and set back so I hit the shoulder blade. It went through the shoulder, spine and cut the ball joint in half on the opposite shoulder. It went to the vanes on nothing but solid bone, knocked the deer over and when the arrow stuck in the ground, the deer slid down the shaft.
Then a guy comes here with arrows that weigh 300 and some gr but he brags about speed. Guess what, hit the shoulder or a big bone going in and the arrow just stops right there---lost deer.
Don't start the "shot placement" stuff like you do with small caliber revolvers, you do NOT know what an animal will do when you release an arrow.
I watched a hunting show the other night and they showed the guy drawing his bow--he struggled. Then slow motion to the deer. He got 3" behind the front leg into the heart, NO BONES HIT. The entire arrow was hanging out the side of the deer as it ran, do NOT tell me the arrow worked out. He used a Rage broadhead or some expandable. WHY, because the fast bows and light arrows can't be tuned with a good broadhead.
All of you that think speed is more important will eventually lose too many animals and smarten up like us revolver shooters.
Light arrows and fast bows were made for the 3D shooters that can't judge distance the same as the great Vaquero was changed for the pimp loads the cowboy shooters use.
Take the great bows made today and turn them into a proper hunting tool with the proper arrow.
I can't even buy good arrows anymore and hope mine will last until I can no longer pull a bow.

I am not buying your theory here, but it is your theory and not mine. What I do works and has form many years.
I use to shoot big heavy arrows, and I kill game just as dead as with my light arrows. I have seen heavy arrows fail to pass through animals, but the still died in a short distance. Once you hit the vital area, the game is over and the game dies.

Last year when a guy was bow hunting for black bear he stuck a black bear behind the shoulder with a German Kinetic broadhead with a 2 1/2 inch cutting area and heavy wooden arrows. The arrow stopped when it hit the leg bone and the bear bit the arrow in two, but the bear only went 20 yards and died. Two holes are not required, but more desired.

So argue all you want with others here, but a light arrow in the vital zone kills game DEAD...

C'mon Redhawk, would you use a 180 gr boolit with the .44 or would you prefer a 320 gr.
I find many deer with arrows in them. I know I posted pictures of the arrow parts I found when gutting deer.
No, you will not change my mind and I will never use light arrows.

quote:

Originally posted by bfrshooter:
C'mon Redhawk, would you use a 180 gr boolit with the .44 or would you prefer a 320 gr.
I find many deer with arrows in them. I know I posted pictures of the arrow parts I found when gutting deer.
No, you will not change my mind and I will never use light arrows.

We are not talking bullets here, were talking arrows, BIG difference. And I would never want to change your mind. I just know what works for me and have for the past 6 years. So you won't change my mind either.

Why do I see this going back to that old energy versus velocity bullshit that got us at odds once before??? Arrows kill by hemmorhaging. An arrow stuck through a lung, a liver, a jugular, or a femoral artery will kill a deer dead within 100 yards. It doesn't need to go through and trust me, a high double lung won't leave any blood trail from the arrow. The nose and mouth spray will damned sure give you enough evidence to follow up.

There won't ever be a big demand for heavy arrows because too few hunters want to dedicate the necessary time to become proficient with them. Just like bfr noted there, one pin at 20 yards. When I was shooting heavy arrows, that would have been two pins on my sight. Now I have one pin out to 25 yards, the second one at 40, and so on. I actually have a 70 yard pin for shooting targets, but that's only because I'm using LIGHT arrows. Back in the day, 3 pins filled up the riser window, now I can get 5 in there. But definitely more dedication to become proficient with a bow than with a gun. I can shoot 100 pistol rounds sitting on my ass, but 100 arrows is going to require that I go down to the target a few times at least. LOL

Come on George, we haven't had a knock-down, drag out in a while.......

Guess it's old age, but I really don't feel like starting one either. Somehow we've managed to stay housebroken for a good while, so let's keep it that way before Hitman comes around here and slaps us again. LOL

LOL! Sounds good to me!

Sounds good to my as well....

For some reason I'm beginning to sense that there just may have been a slight difference of opinion here on the term "bullet energy"...

In any event, do you guys think that handguns should or shouldn't be included along with archery and muzzleloader in an early deer season? If yes, how would you go about making the argument for it?

Shack, I think they should open the season for deer. Then say you can use whatever method you chose to use.

People that are avid bow hunters can use any form of bow they want, if you want to use a pistol, go ahead as well as a rifle or shotgun.

But we will never see that. You will never get anyone to agree on that. The bow hunters do not want the woods all shot up with gun hunters, no matter if it is just a handgun. Hell we can't get traditional bow hunters to accept modern gear bow hunters.

Well, I won't argue either, if it is working for you, it's OK.
But I will always believe archery season should be just for archers. Once gun hunters move in it disrupts deer movements and throws them off normal patterns. Since it is legal to use archery equipment during gun seasons, you can do what you want but guns should not be allowed during archery only.
I don't like the inline muzzle loaders with scopes during a primitive season either, why not just use a 30-06? Creeping with more and more different tools into more and more seasons takes something away. Seasons are long enough for each tool so if you can't get a deer with each, it is your fault.
Gun hunters might have to wait longer for season openers but does it stop you from using a bow or muzzle loader?
I could kill 10 or 20 deer a day with a rifle during bow season but might only get 1 shot with the bow. Is it GREED that some want to use a revolver during bow season? Why not a .300 mag so you could shoot the deer from under the archer that has waited for a shot for an hour?
Hunting is hunting and shooting is shooting, don't mix them.

Hunting is Hunting. No matter the implement.

Here in Delaware, Bow hunters get from Sept 1st Tell February 1st.
Muzzleloader's get one week in October and one in January
Shotgun/ handgun season 1 week in November and one in December
Handgun season on week in January.
Come on, bow hunters get more than enough time in the woods by themselves.