• 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

Pods

I oppose legalization/regulation of anectine pods in conjunction with standard broadheads for huntin

  • Yay

    Votes: 25 38.5%

  • nay

    Votes: 25 38.5%

  • Uncertain

    Votes: 11 16.9%

  • Wait...pods aren't legal?

    Votes: 4 6.2%
  • Total voters
    65
NMSbowhunter said:
Pods are a moot point anyway. The drug used in them is a controlled substance and is illegal to possess without a license.
Click to expand...
For sure we're not getting something declassified just to kill deer. It's a fun convo though.

Heck, we can't declassify a substance that's physiologically non-addictive and shown to have a better than 50% rate of curing alcoholism while having an astronomically large LD50.
 
Yeah, it's pretty crazy to think it was actually a thing there for a while. Sort of like when Coca-cola lived up to its name.
 
cville_bowhunter said:
How long was it determined for anectine to effectively kill a deer? I lost the number that was offered earlier, but if it is anything above a minute or two, I would be concerned with losing the deer despite it certainly being killed. A deer, hit marginally, can run a very long way in a relatively short period of time. If it is a marginal hit, too, I would be worried that less of the drug would be introduced to the animals blood stream, taking even longer to kill it than prescribed doses. So, the deer is hit, runs off and dies; it runs a long way. Is it going to be recovered? Will the use of pods effectively increase the recovery rate of deer, even if it is sure to kill more of those hit? I genuinely don't know, but these are type of questions I'd like answers to before being pro pods. Do we want a deer that is marginally hit to surely die? I don't know, and I haven't got my mind made up on that one either.
Click to expand...

Very, very, very valid points!!!
 
I voted nay, that I don't oppose legalization of pods. I remember them, and remember them being used by more people than didn't. But, I never did. I don't really care if people use them.

What I did see in this thread, that is utter nonsense, is that the reason we do anything is to be accepted by others. Maybe that's not exactly what was said, but something along those lines.
 
Nutterbuster said:
I found user Papalapin's posts most interesting:

We used the "sliding sleeve" as it was called. It was the one made with the top of a syringe. It was tapped to screw into the end of the arrow, and had a female end that the broad head screwed into. the shaft was milled down in the center with an o-ring on each end that kept the powder in place. When the arrow hit the deer, the base of the syringe end would be slid back on the shaft, releasing the powder. I never saw a deer hit that did not go down. 60 seconds if the deer walked away, 15 seconds if he ran. The key was to shoot for the kill zone. IF hit right, the powder would spill into the body cavity and have little effect, but the broadhead would do the job. If you made a bad hit into a meaty spot. The powder did the job. Of course, some guys just shot for a hip or butt shot.

Anectine-- SUCCINYL CHOLINE CHOLRIDE (SCC) is a chemical used in surgery. A slow drip will keep any voluntary muscle from moveing. The lungs are semi-voluntary muscle and SCC will shut them down. The heart however, is an involuntary muscle, is not effectred by the drug, and will keep pumping it through the system until the deer sufficates. First to go are the legs. The deer drops, next are the lungs. suffication is imminent. If the deer does not get enough of a dose, he will recover. The drug dissapates in about 45 minutes and leaves no trace. If the broadhead does not kill the deer, he will survive.

The meat is edible, SCC leaves not trace or effect after 45 minutes.

The POD was developed by a Mississippi doctor that pushed for legalization of it's use with SCC. The interesting thing was that it became legal to buy and use the pod, but it was illigal to buy or sell the SCC. However, if you had it, it was legal to use it. I heard just recently that it was still legal in MS, but that may be wrong.

Another short lived product was the hypo-arrow. It was actually a large bore hypodermic needle that screwd into the end of the arrow, and no broadhead was used. It also used SCC but in a liquid form that was injectible. You mixed the powder strongly in water. It had an even quicker effect than the pod since disolving time was not an issue.

Boy, this sure brings back memories of the good ole days. Sitting around the campfire arguing about if the pod was ethicle or not. :hammers:

It was a very humane way to put a deer down, and very quick, but very controversial and most bowhunting associations condemmned it to be unsportsmanlike. There were many articles written on it from both sides of the issue.

A lot of time has passed since it was introduced in the '60's, and lots of things have changed. Back then compound bows were illigal. The bow could not be "drawn, held, or released, by a mechanical device" Also crossbows were illigal. It is still illigal in most states (if not all) to hunt with poisoned tipped arrows. Who knows, one day that may also change. Whether it should or not be legal can open another very heated debate.

Right now a hot topic in Georgia is legalized baiting. Many states already have it. It is up for consideration in Georgia now, Many hunters will oppose it. Many will accept it. If it passes, some will bait, some will refuse to. No different with the pod. If it is considered for legalization in any state, some will oppose it, some will oppose it. Look at the crossbow situation in Georgia. Many bow hunters opposed them. Some of the opposer are now shooting them. Back in the early '70's it was the same with the compound bow. They were iligal for hunting and opposed by may bowhunters. Where are they now. Time, and acceptance, change things

Keep in mind that, at the time ,the pod was being conidered as a means of recovering, deer that would otherwie be lost, wasted, and die a slow painful death. It was supported by many ethical hunters. Just as in this thread, there were differing opinions on both side of the issue. I used it on two deer in Mississippi. One wa a good hit and the broad head did the job. On the other, the deer jumped the string and spun around. I hit it in the flank. He rand about ten yd and stopped, looked back to se what had hit him. Within 20 second his legs got wobbly, he took one step and his leg gave out. If I ha not had the pod, that deer would never have been found. WASTED!!.

I ask if you hunt with a compound. If you do, you would have been considered one of the most unethical, unsportsman bowhunters of the time. That was the view point back then. But, times change. If the pod had been legalized back then, by now, it would be considered a common thing now in everyday bow hunting.

It was not hunting ethics that kept it illigal. It was the fact that it was a controlled substance, and thought to be to dangerous to hunter in case of an accident. There were a few cases in Mississippi where hunters fell on an arrow and died, not from the broadhead damage, but from the effects of SCC.

You are entitled to your opinion, and I respect you for it. However, back then, and still now, there were, and are a LOT of hunters that pick up a bow, do not learn how to shoot it accurately and head for the woods with dull razorheads, and could not hit the kill zone from 5 yds. I would just as soon see these hunters using pods to be more humane to the deer. Have you ever seen a doe running through the woods with 6 arrow sticking out of her, none lethal hits, with three teenagers chasing after her. I have. Not a pretty site.

Should the pod have been legalized? Should it be now? Talk about a heated debate. You have never een one as hot as that one would be; agiain!!


He does mention some hunter accidents. That's a first for me.



Again, that's not really an ethical problem. A dead deer is a dead deer, and the ham hit deer wouldn't suffer any more than a double lunged one.

You're making @kyler1945's point. You're coming at this from how you and other hunters perceive it and comparing it against how you perceive another method of harvest. It's all the same to the deer. They don't care about sportsmanship. It's crossguns vs trad bows with a new skin for a new year.
Click to expand...
I guess the anti hunters should really be for this b/c it could increase hunter self inflicted mortal wounds…… I guess that’s a different sell.
 
i'm just wondering....if you used an 80 lbs 2023 PSE Omen, an 800 grain arrow, 1" single bevel and one of these poison Tide pods....how many deer could you shoot through stacked side by side and poison-kill all of them....i'm saying minimum of 3 deer....and they wouldn't go 20
 
rhagenw said:
@Nutterbuster is just being controversial and offer no rebuttal to his contradiction. Like I said in a previous comment. If him or @kyler1945 starts a thread it is merely click bait. Not saying I won't sit down in a common place and bullshit. Just saying they are predictable monkeys.
Click to expand...
Definitely guilty of being controversial.

Rebuttal was on hold while I found out the gender of my $250,000 vanity project.

Me writing that and then not letting y'all in on the knowledge is kinda clickbait. If my opening post teases something juicy not delivered in 14 pages of enthusiastic discussion...

Glad you're here to BS with me.

I take no offense in being called predictable. Or a monkey. Many wondrous things are delightfully predictable, and monkeys are cool.

Kyler and myself are the primary proponents of pods. He claims to be mostly floating the idea, and I'm sold on it. Both of us are many things, but proponents of thoughtlessness we aren't. I have no intention of letting an arrow, pod tipped or no, loose without having an expectation of what's happening. We've both drank several bottles of liquor and burned a lot of wood hashing out the particulars of shot placement and archery tackle. More than once, and at a level that would put most people on this thread to sleep.

So I'm a fan of good shot placement.

Good shot placement in my book is a shot deliberately placed in the area that you have reason to believe has the highest probability of yielding a dead critter. Currently, @skydoc and myself probably agree that that area is somewhere in the chest cavity, forwards of the diaphragm and missing heavy shoulder bone, allowing for a double lung or heart/lung hit.

If I'm allowed to put a pod on my arrow, and if I am as certain about its dependability and lethality as I am about my broadhead, and if I don't have a shot at the chest cavity, and if I've decided letting one walk isn't an option...I'm not above saying that I'd make the decision to target whatever large muscle with good blood flow I thought I had a bead on.

I say that as a crossgun hunter with a firm self-imposed 30 yard cap in place who really prefers 20 yards and in, and a rifle hunter who won't freehand a deer past 50 yards, and a waterfowl hunter who won't shoot past his 30 yard decoy. I'd call that pretty conscientious and conservative. I like shots that result in dead animals.

I don't think a pod changes the math on my effective range, or means that I am taking every shot at every animal within that range. But sure...the calculation changes based on the hardware I'm packing. My math looks different with a pod/broadhead combo than it looks with just a broadhead. The math also looks different with a scoped 30-06. But in no scenario am I flinging projectiles with just hope and prayers.

I would say that even with a pod, there are shots you don't take. Head shots. Shots at alert deer. Shots through thick brush that may deflect the shaft and deploy the mech blades or the pod prematurely. Leg shots. Shots at moving deer. Shots beyond the range at which you can accurately call your hit points.

Accuse me of semantics if you want, but I think there's a difference between adjusting your math and throwing it out the window with blind faith in the latest whiz-bang pod, a 3.5" tungsten load, a .300 win mag, a 450fps Ravin...etc.
 
rhagenw said:
@Nutterbuster is just being controversial and offer no rebuttal to his contradiction. Like I said in a previous comment. If him or @kyler1945 starts a thread it is merely click bait. Not saying I won't sit down in a common place and bullshit. Just saying they are predictable monkeys.
Click to expand...

I'll bend an ear to those guys, they're clever chaps.

And it's not even necessarily true that @Nutterbuster was contradictory. Perhaps he evolved from his original line of thinking, which is still apropos as it demonstrates maybe a bit of the slippery slope.
 
I'll throw an example out.

Say all of your buddies hunt with 60lb bows, 28" draw lengths, 400 grain arrows, and 100 grain rage heads. You hunt together for years, and discover through trial and error that you're successful at killing deer standing broadside and quartering away, but quartering-towards shots usually end in frustration.

You encounter the Ashby thing. You're a beefy enough boy to handle 70lbs and a 30" draw. You build a 650 grain arrow and tip it with a stout single-bevel head. You announce your plans to no longer consider quartering-forwards deer off-the-menu. Sure, you'd rather them be...but if he's big and that's your shot you're shooting it.

"Well, I guess some folks just don't care about proper shot placement. I'm disappointed in you for taking the easy way out."
 
Nutterbuster said:
Definitely guilty of being controversial.

Rebuttal was on hold while I found out the gender of my $250,000 vanity project.

Me writing that and then not letting y'all in on the knowledge is kinda clickbait. If my opening post teases something juicy not delivered in 14 pages of enthusiastic discussion...

Glad you're here to BS with me.

I take no offense in being called predictable. Or a monkey. Many wondrous things are delightfully predictable, and monkeys are cool.

Kyler and myself are the primary proponents of pods. He claims to be mostly floating the idea, and I'm sold on it. Both of us are many things, but proponents of thoughtlessness we aren't. I have no intention of letting an arrow, pod tipped or no, loose without having an expectation of what's happening. We've both drank several bottles of liquor and burned a lot of wood hashing out the particulars of shot placement and archery tackle. More than once, and at a level that would put most people on this thread to sleep.

So I'm a fan of good shot placement.

Good shot placement in my book is a shot deliberately placed in the area that you have reason to believe has the highest probability of yielding a dead critter. Currently, @skydoc and myself probably agree that that area is somewhere in the chest cavity, forwards of the diaphragm and missing heavy shoulder bone, allowing for a double lung or heart/lung hit.

If I'm allowed to put a pod on my arrow, and if I am as certain about its dependability and lethality as I am about my broadhead, and if I don't have a shot at the chest cavity, and if I've decided letting one walk isn't an option...I'm not above saying that I'd make the decision to target whatever large muscle with good blood flow I thought I had a bead on.

I say that as a crossgun hunter with a firm self-imposed 30 yard cap in place who really prefers 20 yards and in, and a rifle hunter who won't freehand a deer past 50 yards, and a waterfowl hunter who won't shoot past his 30 yard decoy. I'd call that pretty conscientious and conservative. I like shots that result in dead animals.

I don't think a pod changes the math on my effective range, or means that I am taking every shot at every animal within that range. But sure...the calculation changes based on the hardware I'm packing. My math looks different with a pod/broadhead combo than it looks with just a broadhead. The math also looks different with a scoped 30-06. But in no scenario am I flinging projectiles with just hope and prayers.

I would say that even with a pod, there are shots you don't take. Head shots. Shots at alert deer. Shots through thick brush that may deflect the shaft and deploy the mech blades or the pod prematurely. Leg shots. Shots at moving deer. Shots beyond the range at which you can accurately call your hit points.

Accuse me of semantics if you want, but I think there's a difference between adjusting your math and throwing it out the window with blind faith in the latest whiz-bang pod, a 3.5" tungsten load, a .300 win mag, a 450fps Ravin...etc.
Click to expand...

Congrats.
 
I wasn’t telling people I think everything they do is driven by survival and procreating to be controversial just to be controversial.

I laid it out so that my reasoning for some of the things I believe makes sense to you.

It’s a conversation in good faith. I don’t want anyone to be confused about what I mean. That’s not the point. If I believe we all hunt for the sport of it and meat and all the other noble reasons, I would think pods are a dumb idea and lead to anarchy.

Because I don’t believe that, I’m much less afraid of a very effective tool in a very narrow scope of use.

I’m a very disagreeable person. As far on that spectrum as you can get. Doesn’t mean I don’t like people and value relationships and love people and enjoy some of the same things you do.

I don’t whine about your agreeableness. Not because I don’t care that you’re agreeable, but because I know you can’t help it. Your dials are set. And I love you the way you are.

This is a post to a collective you.

Don’t take my straightforward, lack of sugar with the medicine to mean I don’t care or don’t think before I talk. Im aware of how many perceive me. Im also aware of an endless PM box of messages where real relationships have been built, often due to a misunderstanding.

If you think im stirring the pot with no purpose, you’re wrong.

If you think I intend to change your mind on a controversial topic on the spot, you’re wrong.

Back to your regularly scheduled podcasting…. See what I did there
 
LAKY said:
I voted nay, that I don't oppose legalization of pods. I remember them, and remember them being used by more people than didn't. But, I never did. I don't really care if people use them.

What I did see in this thread, that is utter nonsense, is that the reason we do anything is to be accepted by others. Maybe that's not exactly what was said, but something along those lines.
Click to expand...

It’s exactly what I said, you got it right.

I think it’s probably a topic for a different thread, or a PM. But do you think I just made that idea up out of thin air? Do you think I’d toss that out there, knowing how folks like you would receive it, Willy nilly?

Have you considered that maybe, just maybe, it could be true? Have you looked into why anyone might think it’s true? Are you afraid it’s true?
 
kyler1945 said:
It’s exactly what I said, you got it right.

I think it’s probably a topic for a different thread, or a PM. But do you think I just made that idea up out of thin air? Do you think I’d toss that out there, knowing how folks like you would receive it, Willy nilly?

Have you considered that maybe, just maybe, it could be true? Have you looked into why anyone might think it’s true? Are you afraid it’s true?
Click to expand...
There are more reasons people do what they do. Sure, one may be to be accepted by others. Another reason is because it is pleasurable. Another reason is to avoid displeasure. There are several reasons people do things that don't even involve other people or other people even knowing about what they are doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top