• The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
  • We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules

Spikes, Bolts, and Screw in Steps

Should Spikes, Bolts, and Screw in steps be made legal on public land?

  • Total voters
    62
kyler1945 said:
Again,

Not leaving things in the woods for 24 hours makes this a moot point.

I just can’t see people getting hurt or dying due to metal in tree as an issue worth including jn this conversation.

And if it is, it’s so small as to be easily mitigated by engineering controls and a small amount of money.

That leaves timber value reduction, and tree health.

Again, both easily quantifiable, and can be taxed out of being an issue.
Click to expand...
That’s because your ignorant to the fact that loggers have been killed or seriously injured due to this and why saw mills run their raw trees through metal detectors prior to planking them. Too much liability for injury and damage to expensive equipment. When you have worked for and with loggers you’ll know what to talk about.
 
Noonespecial said:
That’s because your ignorant to the fact that loggers have been killed or seriously injured due to this and why saw mills run their raw trees through metal detectors prior to planking them. Too much liability for injury and damage to expensive equipment. When you have worked for and with loggers you’ll know what to talk about.
Click to expand...

I’m not ignorant to it occurring.

I’m ignorant to the math. Are you?

If not, please share what you know. Specifically, how many people die, or are seriously injured due to metal being left in trees. Yearly rates, totals with a span of time, I’m eager to digest any available data.

It is indeed a very dangerous job, from what I can gather. I’ve only cut down several hundred trees and milled only a couple hundred. I’ve run into metal in both activities. I’ve not sustained any injuries nor had any near misses. But my experience is very limited.

This is why I’m asking for good information!

Not sure where the hostility is coming from though.
 
Worked in the industry for years along with many close friends no math needed from personal experience. If it happened once or 100,000 times its too much. Can’t replace a life or limb due to a case hardened steel rod left in a tree.
 
kyler1945 said:
I think it’s a great idea.

This is what started the whole discussion anyway!

Money spent trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist when using spurs and bolts and screw ins, can be spent mitigating the use of spurs and bolts and screw ins.
Click to expand...
Current pole shows it'd be unlikely to persuade people to pay for the use of steps/bolts.
 
Good dialogue. I’d really like to use bolts more.
Indifferent, I guess. Public; removable bolts yes, others no.
Beaver, wind storms, pestilence, pilated woodpeckers, lightning and “select cutting” take out more trees than I’ll climb in my life.
having used bolts they do not appear any more impactful to tree health than camming over WE Stepps.

*in NH , unposted private tracts can be hunted like public. I’ve been using sticks / cam strap on steps, when hiking in on these pieces.
I try to be aware of the perception of Hunting / Hunters.

The plus for me on bolts is the potential to return to a tree and / or multiple presets. I don’t think there is an easier , affordable , reasonably safe or more durable option out there. Most noticeable when it gets real cold and offsets bulk of larger set ups.

Cam strap steps, for a one and done area are slightly easier for me; than drilling new holes , slower on take down but both are pretty smooth. I’m surprised strap on steps, are not more popular given the weight / cost savings vs the new high end sticks. I attribute this to new ”content “ , as threads / videos do not garner as much attention as “new ultralight $$$ stick” . Im watching as amsteel attachment methods evolve.

both bolts and cam straps give me enough pause to evaluate why I’m picking a tree

summary: I hope to drill trees in moderation.
 
Noonespecial said:
Worked in the industry for years along with many close friends no math needed from personal experience. If it happened once or 100,000 times its too much. Can’t replace a life or limb due to a case hardened steel rod left in a tree.
Click to expand...

I struggle with the “one life is too many” logic.

Alcohol, interstates, guns, sugar, the list is a mile long of dangerous things that we tolerate for personal benefit. If we went by “one is too many”, for everyone’s pet issue, then we’d have nothing to do.

I’m not downplaying the significance of anyone’s injury or death. I’m just trying to be fair, and pragmatic about it.

Im struggling to see how continuing to log/mill at all is ok, when injuries due to metal in wood are at worst a fraction of the injuries and death due to other hazards of the job. If one is too many, why are we logging/milling in the first place, case hardened steel aside?
 
kyler1945 said:
This can be quantified and measured.

And it can be offset.

It might not be a palatable number. But I bet I’d be willing to pay it.
Click to expand...
But, the state is not willing to pay it, thus the law. They don't want the liability or the lack in revenue.
 
LAKY said:
But, the state is not willing to pay it, thus the law. They don't want the liability or the lack in revenue.
Click to expand...

I still cut both ends off my hams even though I have a big enough oven to fit em.

There’s a law in place. Based on certain previous circumstances and assumptions. And the momentum of keeping it the same.

The law will not be changed, if everyone agrees on the assumptions that led to it being made. That would not make any sense. I’m not asking anyone to do that. I’m asking people to consider that the assumptions may be wrong, and that the circumstances may be different. They can go right back to the comfy couch after whispering the blasphemy in their own heads. No need to remain a heretic. It’s risk free!
 
kyler1945 said:
I still cut both ends off my hams even though I have a big enough oven to fit em.

There’s a law in place. Based on certain previous circumstances and assumptions. And the momentum of keeping it the same.

The law will not be changed, if everyone agrees on the assumptions that led to it being made. That would not make any sense. I’m not asking anyone to do that. I’m asking people to consider that the assumptions may be wrong, and that the circumstances may be different. They can go right back to the comfy couch after whispering the blasphemy in their own heads. No need to remain a heretic. It’s risk free!
Click to expand...
A lower value for lumber defects is definitely not an assumption. Give the public free rein to run around defecting trees?
 
LAKY said:
A lower value for lumber defects is definitely not an assumption. Give the public free rein to run around defecting trees?
Click to expand...

You think that that value reduction is either so big as to not be overcome, or not able to be measured.

I disagree. And once that value is established, let people pay to mitigate it.

We currently pay for licenses/fees/permits to manage our ecosystems. This is no different.

Mostly, I’m amazed that there’s an 8 figure industry centered around climbing trees to kill deer. And I’m willing to bet that the cost of allowing people to climb with spurs or bolts would be less than the money spent in that industry.

Like I said before, it’s just pointing the firehose of money in a different direction.
 
kyler1945 said:
You think that that value reduction is either so big as to not be overcome, or not able to be measured.

I disagree. And once that value is established, let people pay to mitigate it.

We currently pay for licenses/fees/permits to manage our ecosystems. This is no different.

Mostly, I’m amazed that there’s an 8 figure industry centered around climbing trees to kill deer. And I’m willing to bet that the cost of allowing people to climb with spurs or bolts would be less than the money spent in that industry.

Like I said before, it’s just pointing the firehose of money in a different direction.
Click to expand...
Who pays for the mitigation and how?
 
I have saddle hunted over 20 years. I used a drill and 6" x 3/8 grade 8 bolts up until last year. Because of a new hunting location I had to switch to sticks or a climbing stand. I bought 8 Trophyline/Novix Double strep Mini sticks. I made the following modifications, 1/4" Amsteel rope for hanging the sticks. I also added 18" cable aiders. with 5 sticks I can easily put my platform 20-21 feet off the ground.
I still prefer the bolt steps. They only go in 2" and within 30-45 days the holes sap up and grow closed. I have hunted hundreds of trees. I can't remember ever killing any trees and I have redrilled thousands of holes over the years. I made a slap hammer bolt puller for bolts left in a tree longer than 6 months.
 
Wait a minute, are you boys hunting pine plantations that we use to build houses and crap with? If so it's a hard no. It's currently way to high to build right now I would in no way want lumber prices to go up.
 
kyler1945 said:
I struggle with the “one life is too many” logic.

Alcohol, interstates, guns, sugar, the list is a mile long of dangerous things that we tolerate for personal benefit. If we went by “one is too many”, for everyone’s pet issue, then we’d have nothing to do.

I’m not downplaying the significance of anyone’s injury or death. I’m just trying to be fair, and pragmatic about it.

Im struggling to see how continuing to log/mill at all is ok, when injuries due to metal in wood are at worst a fraction of the injuries and death due to other hazards of the job. If one is too many, why are we logging/milling in the first place, case hardened steel aside?
Click to expand...

I think I'm following you but I'm wondering if maybe I'm taking you out of context. How many loggers and lumbermen have to die or be maimed earning a modest living before we should care enough to be mildly inconveniced in one of our recreational pursuits? Ten, ever? A thousand a year?

I own guns and ride motorcycles on the interstate and eat sugar and drink alcohol but I'm not sure that comparing basic food and transport or human rights to rather niche recreational pursuits enjoyed by a tiny minority of the population is entirely reasonable.
 
kyler1945 said:
I’m on same page with leaving nothing.

Exceptions: I think the rule should be 24 hours from the last time your hands touched the gear. This would allow for leaving a set overnight to be hunted the next morning, or to go get lunch and come back and hunt.

This seems to be the catch all. And pleases anyone worried about porcupine encounters. If the fuzz or a front of class type finds stuff in a tree, it’s either obviously old and can be removed, or can be seen again in 24 hours and if still there, removed.

I would also be ok with a rider on this regulation that it is not illegal to take obviously abandoned(clearly left for over 24 hours) gear. And leave this up to agents and judges to suss out any conflicts here.


Simple effective regulation.

This leaves just the “you’ll kill all the trees” arguments. Which to me, is a financial equation, not a moral dilemma.
Click to expand...
The LAST thing you guys want is a 24 hour rule on equipment in the woods. . You DON'T want more regulation in the woods. There are TOO many Kevin's and Karen's in the world now that mind everybody else's business but their own.. I say you hunt how you want to and I'll hunt how I want to. Most of the guys on this site are mobile and are using saddles. They leave very little imprint on the woods. They are young, fairly young or young enough to be mobile. A 24 hour rule really doesn't affect saddle hunters because they are already doing that. In and out and then moving on. What about the older guys? What about the tree stand guys? Setting up a hang on stand can be a lot of work sometimes. Ladder stands are even more work. Too much work to be doing EVERY time you hunt. I had one set up on state land by my daughters house so I could sit w/ my grandkids. We didn't see crap but they thought it was cool. A 24 hour rule takes that away from me. What about the guy that has limited amount of time to hunt after work. He has a stand set up some where close so he can get in a real quick hunt after work. A 24 hour takes that away from him. I know lot's of guys that do this. I have 2 guys that have permission to hunt the same property that I do. They use that permission to access state land. The one guy is 88! God bless him. I hope I'm still hunting when I'm his age. The other guy is in his late 70's. These guys have an annual hunt every year for a week. So they are supposed to take down their ladder stands every time? A 24 hour rule pretty much takes their whole week a away from them. It's Not feasible or fair. Where do you draw the line? Saddles and hangs have to be taken down but ladders can stay? That won't work either. The tree huggers are trying to solve a problem that DOESN'T exist. Yes some guys abandon their stuff. Usually some one comes along and takes it any way. Yes we leave holes in the trees. The trees do just fine. We get a cut and we put a band aid on it, and live on. The tree's do the same thing. Yes some guys spike trees. No big deal. Most of the trees will NEVER see a sawmill anyway. I can crank mine out at anytime and have done so in the past. If you guys are going to propose rule changes to hunting then you have to think about how those changes would affect ALL hunters.
 
1simplemann said:
The LAST thing you guys want is a 24 hour rule on equipment in the woods. . You DON'T want more regulation in the woods. There are TOO many Kevin's and Karen's in the world now that mind everybody else's business but their own.. I say you hunt how you want to and I'll hunt how I want to. Most of the guys on this site are mobile and are using saddles. They leave very little imprint on the woods. They are young, fairly young or young enough to be mobile. A 24 hour rule really doesn't affect saddle hunters because they are already doing that. In and out and then moving on. What about the older guys? What about the tree stand guys? Setting up a hang on stand can be a lot of work sometimes. Ladder stands are even more work. Too much work to be doing EVERY time you hunt. I had one set up on state land by my daughters house so I could sit w/ my grandkids. We didn't see crap but they thought it was cool. A 24 hour rule takes that away from me. What about the guy that has limited amount of time to hunt after work. He has a stand set up some where close so he can get in a real quick hunt after work. A 24 hour takes that away from him. I know lot's of guys that do this. I have 2 guys that have permission to hunt the same property that I do. They use that permission to access state land. The one guy is 88! God bless him. I hope I'm still hunting when I'm his age. The other guy is in his late 70's. These guys have an annual hunt every year for a week. So they are supposed to take down their ladder stands every time? A 24 hour rule pretty much takes their whole week a away from them. It's Not feasible or fair. Where do you draw the line? Saddles and hangs have to be taken down but ladders can stay? That won't work either. The tree huggers are trying to solve a problem that DOESN'T exist. Yes some guys abandon their stuff. Usually some one comes along and takes it any way. Yes we leave holes in the trees. The trees do just fine. We get a cut and we put a band aid on it, and live on. The tree's do the same thing. Yes some guys spike trees. No big deal. Most of the trees will NEVER see a sawmill anyway. I can crank mine out at anytime and have done so in the past. If you guys are going to propose rule changes to hunting then you have to think about how those changes would affect ALL hunters.
Click to expand...

I don’t think climbing trees materially increases the chances of success for most hunters.

I don’t think climbing trees at 70-90 years old is a risk worth taking for most hunters.

Combining these two priors, it makes a lot more sense to set up a ground blind for this demographic.

The catch for me here is that if a feller is a good enough hunter to improve his odds by climbing a tree, and he’s in good enough shape and good enough at risk management to put a stand in a tree once, he can do it ten times.

Also, this really a moot point. There’s already physical impairment access and equipment rules in place for folks who have trouble. And if that needs expanding to allow an 85 year old man to leave his ladder stand in the woods all season, it seems simple enough.
 
kyler1945 said:
I don’t think climbing trees materially increases the chances of success for most hunters.

I don’t think climbing trees at 70-90 years old is a risk worth taking for most hunters.

Combining these two priors, it makes a lot more sense to set up a ground blind for this demographic.

The catch for me here is that if a feller is a good enough hunter to improve his odds by climbing a tree, and he’s in good enough shape and good enough at risk management to put a stand in a tree once, he can do it ten times.

Also, this really a moot point. There’s already physical impairment access and equipment rules in place for folks who have trouble. And if that needs expanding to allow an 85 year old man to leave his ladder stand in the woods all season, it seems simple enough.
Click to expand...
Why does age have to be a requirement? I'm 58. If I want to put up a ladder stand to hunt w/ my grandkid then I'm gonna do it. You don't get to tell me how I hunt. Nor do I get to tell you how to hunt. If some 88 year old guy wants to hunt w/ ladder stand then so be it. His choice, I'm not going to be the one to regulate him so he has to hunt on the ground. Where do we draw the line to expand the rules to include him and others in his situations? How do you keep it fair? Someone is always going to be excluded and be butt hurt. The fairest way to do is no restrictions at all. Climbing trees ABSOLUTELY gives us an advantage. That's why we do it . This whole site is based on that very premise. This is America. Land of the FREE. We don't need more rules.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top