Spikes, Bolts, and Screw in Steps

[gcr0003]

A woodpecker is a bird. A wood pecker...

I said what I said, make both of those peckers illegal

 

[Horn]

I’m not saying yay or nay for anything but I could see people preferring bolts for compactness/bulk and not having to manage a dozen straps. Bolts are a lot more rigid/sturdy as well. They don’t slide around and they make easy handles to help pull yourself up.

I'll buy that they're more stable and make good hand holds. Ratchet straps. Sticks are stable, make decent hand holds and use a lot less straps. I'm just not sold

 

[Nutterbuster]

I said what I said, make both of those peckers illegal

Man doesn't have dominion over nature. He's subservient to it!



Dig it

 

[John 35]

Why specifically is a screw/bolt better than a squirrel step or Cranford or the XOP folder or either of hawks' steps? This is where it seems to me its really hard to justify the hole vs the plentiful options that probably leave much less, if any, damage to the tree

Strap type steps are complete crap. They are not at all stable compared to screw ins. I tinkered around with them and concluded I’d rather just carry sticks than use strap steps.

 

[gcr0003]

I'll buy that they're more stable and make good hand holds. Ratchet straps. Sticks are stable, make decent hand holds and use a lot less straps. I'm just not sold

Well we weren’t comparing sticks we were comparing steps lol. Sticks are decently stable yes but they are not as compact as a Treehopper drill and 12 bolts. Everything has a +/- and some of that matters to people some of it doesn’t. Again, I don’t own em but I can see the why.

 

[kyler1945]

Another reason I like bolts is my severe aversion to climbing a tree when there is no good reason for deer to be under it. How are these related?

Bolt set up - I have to drill 6-15 holes, taking me 6-15 minutes to get to height. This is longer than sticks. I’m less likely to climb a tree because of this.



But isn’t that why sticks are superior Kyle?!!!! They’re faster and easier to set up!


Sure. They are. Admittedly. Now, let’s have a contest. You climb down your sticks and pack them up to go home. I’ll climb down my bolts and pack up to go home. Last person to the truck buys the beer.

 

[kyler1945]

Installing and climbing bolts allows for a much less risky climb. Assuming the user doesn’t climb dead trees, and understands/implements proper lineman’s belt usage.

 

[jtw0057]

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.

Sounds like you would like hunting in Georgia. The only thing I’m curious about is what they define as a “hunt”. I’ve taken it as the day following the hunting season on that piece. But I guess it could be read as the day you intend to hunt as well. I think a lot of these rules are catered more towards the quota hunts they have all over the state as opposed to the regular season dates on some properties.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Weldabeast]

Come to think of it those dang bucks kill a bunch of trees every year too.....kill the bucks to save the trees...these piney woods bucks will leave a mile long scrape line of nothing but little dead pines and bay trees

 

[sb220]

its not about killing trees. its about the lumber guys that kill em. They dont want lumber that have grown around screw-ins or nails. Ever wonder why they leave that one tree in a clear cut with the 40 year old 2x4 stand?
Spikes should be legal, but bolts could be left and forgotten, so they are under the screw-in umbrella

 

[thedutchtouch]

its not about killing trees. its about the lumber guys that kill em. They dont want lumber that have grown around screw-ins or nails. Ever wonder why they leave that one tree in a clear cut with the 40 year old 2x4 stand?
Spikes should be legal, but bolts could be left and forgotten, so they are under the screw-in umbrella

Shh the anti loggers will be out putting screws in every tree soon if they hear that! Lol

 

[sb220]

Shh the anti loggers will be out putting screws in every tree soon if they hear that! Lol

Or we make it known to em and then we can no-stick method next year

 

[thedutchtouch]

Or we make it known to em and then we can no-stick method next year

Magnetic boots. Game changer.

 

[John 35]

It’s a little funny that this debate moves between screw ins are bad because they hurt trees and screw ins are bad because they hurt logging. Are we worried about the trees or not.

 

[kyler1945]

It’s a little funny that this debate moves between screw ins are bad because they hurt trees and screw ins are bad because they hurt logging. Are we worried about the trees or not.

I see a distinction without a difference.

I view any downside in financial terms. It can be quantified, and then can be offset at the expense of those causing it.

If people say that loggers and mill operators will die, again, there’s a value assigned to that. I’m not being crass. But it can be quantified, and controls implemented to mitigate it. And that cost can be shared with the people generating it.

My whole point here, has been that whatever number you can come up with for the few million dollars of lost lumber value and number of people who die in wood related accidents jumping from 3 to 4 and their families being compensated for their losses, pales in comparison to the tens of millions of dollars spent on mobile climbing gear, and you’ll gain 5 or 10 rednecks back who shouldn’t have been using aiders.

This doesn’t even take into consideration that much of our deer habitats likely improve with less trees, assuming we are killing them. If we aren’t, it’s a wash.

 

[John 35]

I see a distinction without a difference.

I view any downside in financial terms. It can be quantified, and then can be offset at the expense of those causing it.

If people say that loggers and mill operators will die, again, there’s a value assigned to that. I’m not being crass. But it can be quantified, and controls implemented to mitigate it. And that cost can be shared with the people generating it.

My whole point here, has been that whatever number you can come up with for the few million dollars of lost lumber value and number of people who die in wood related accidents jumping from 3 to 4 and their families being compensated for their losses, pales in comparison to the tens of millions of dollars spent on mobile climbing gear, and you’ll gain 5 or 10 rednecks back who shouldn’t have been using aiders.

This doesn’t even take into consideration that much of our deer habitats likely improve with less trees, assuming we are killing them. If we aren’t, it’s a wash.

Has anyone ever died from running a saw into a screw in step? I honestly don’t know, but I’m not saying it hasn’t happened. There’s lots of metal that ends up in trees unrelated to hunting. Dang barbed wire is what has given me problems. I think I made a comment earlier about tree removal being a big part of habitat improvement, but damaging trees for hunting purposes gets people upset. I’m not seeing the logical line of reasoning here. The issue of leaving equipment out is the same for sticks or screw ins.

 

[DB4x4]

I voted no simply because I would lose some of my tactical advantage. Make the other Fudds think they have to drag a giant ladder stand back into the woods and most won't go where I do. Strictly a "screw the competition" vote.

 

[Horn]

I see a distinction without a difference.

I view any downside in financial terms. It can be quantified, and then can be offset at the expense of those causing it.

If people say that loggers and mill operators will die, again, there’s a value assigned to that. I’m not being crass. But it can be quantified, and controls implemented to mitigate it. And that cost can be shared with the people generating it.

My whole point here, has been that whatever number you can come up with for the few million dollars of lost lumber value and number of people who die in wood related accidents jumping from 3 to 4 and their families being compensated for their losses, pales in comparison to the tens of millions of dollars spent on mobile climbing gear, and you’ll gain 5 or 10 rednecks back who shouldn’t have been using aiders.

This doesn’t even take into consideration that much of our deer habitats likely improve with less trees, assuming we are killing them. If we aren’t, it’s a wash.

Dude. We have to grow the economy! Maybe that's where the no cheap climbing idea stemmed from in the first place! Better lumber and millions in climbing equipment!

 

[woodsdog2]

Why specifically is a screw/bolt better than a squirrel step or Cranford or the XOP folder or either of hawks' steps? This is where it seems to me its really hard to justify the hole vs the plentiful options that probably leave much less, if any, damage to the tree

You know that’s a great question. I just picked up some of the premium cranford folding rope steps. I always thought they were kind of a joke and didn’t work well and the ropes were flimsy and they just weren’t something that I felt was worthwhile as a practical matter. I’ll have to say though, my assumptions were way off base. So far I’m pretty impressed with them. I picked up two four packs. From a cost benefit analysis they cost me a $100 with the ropes that work like a daisy chain or a chinese finger trap and they actually are very easy to climb with and once set, very sturdy and quiet on the tree. I’ve been watching some videos on using these with climb rsted daisy chain webbing straps to use as an aider or a five step etreir’ with a biner hooked over the step as you advance. Super packable lightweight “high speed low drag” system for those times you just don’t want to have a lot of volume of stuff. With a ROS or a pursuit platform, worse case scenario you’re out < $200. Anyway, check them out:

 

[1simplemann]

You’re from a time pre internet. Seeing huntjng gear in the woods changes my happiness by 0% as well.

The issue, I think, is that available land to hunt is shrinking(both in actual acreage, and the distance from access points). And the number of hunters is not shrinking in equal amounts. And more people are getting “mobile”. The concern is that this will lead to way more stuff left in the woods than an occasional wooden platform or set of climbing poles.

This is a way to compromise with minimal regulation, and minimal externalities foisted upon your fellow hunter.

I don't think that's that's the whole issue. Some people are getting butt hurt because we are "damaging" the tree's w/ screw in's or bolts. IMO that theory doesn't hold water. I've been using screw ins for years. The trees are just fine. Heck sometimes you can't even find the holes from the year before. Taking them down after the season. I'm fine w/ that. Not building a permanent stand, I'm fine with that. (They become eye sores anyway) Not leaving tree stands, etc on timber ground. I'm fine w/ that.

I've seen many a set up in my day. I used to get upset. I've been hunting around other hunters my whole career. Just Hunt harder and better than them and you'll be successful. If you think your going to go into the woods and not a set up think again. Limiting how we hunt is the last thing we need. The less regulation the better.