Primitive Hunting, Primitive Camping What Does It Mean?

What does primitive hunting, primitive camping and the notion of primitive outdoor sports really mean? Ever notice that sometimes you know what something is---or think you do---but can’t define it? That’s because how we name many of our activities is relative to other things, without a pure definition.

Take the word “primitive,” for instance. To somebody who camps in a megabucks motorhome, cooking in a microwave, the people down the way, who are sleeping in a nylon backpacking tent and using a pump-up cookstove, are primitive camping. But to an historic reenactor, curled up in a wool blanket, trying to coax a fire from wet wood, the folks in that tent are using the most modern, high tech, gear. Nothing primitive about it.

Same goes for hunting and shooting equipment. In most states, an in-line muzzleloader qualifies as a primitive hunting weapon. To the flintlock enthusiast, however, that in-line is a modern firearm, no different from a Model 70 Winchester---which many of them resemble. In fact, this is an on-going argument, with those favoring old-time ignition systems arguing that just because it loads from the front doesn’t make it a primitive hunting weapon.

The “what is primitive” debate can have serious repercussions, though. One example, Kentucky has a “pioneer weapons area” where hunters are only supposed to use primitive hunting weapons. It was established before in-line muzzleloaders and compound bows became popular. Now a controversy rages of what should qualify as a “pioneer” weapon in that area.

The “what is primitive” argument rages even heavier among archers. Those who carry long bows and recurves sneer at those using high-tech cam bows, claiming, with some justification, that the modern bows are merely machines. In fact, it can be argued, that compound and cam bows should have shortened bow hunting seasons. Originally, archers were given such long seasons specifically because their kill ratios, using primitive arms, were so low. With the advent of high-tech compound (and, later, cam) bows, that “handicap” was removed. In many regions, bow hunters have the same kill ratio as modern firearms hunters. But the sticks & strings guys have three or four months to enjoy their sport, compared to the week or two for those hunting with modern firearms.

The argument is even stronger when it comes to crossbows. Despite what many archers would like to believe, a modern crossbow is precisely the equal of a cam bow, in terms of delivered energy and effective distance. Crossbows have no relationship to firearms, other than how they are mounted and fired. And, frankly, I don’t see much difference between the trigger on a crossbow and the mechanical release on a compound bow.

But the fact is, too, that today’s crossbows have no relationship to the crossbows carried by Cherokee warriors 500 years ago. Is using a crossbow with wheels and cables truly primitive bow hunting?

So, how, then, do we define primitive? To me, primitive outdoor enthusiasts are those who prefer doing things the old-timey way. They choose primitive hunting weapons that reflect our pioneering heritage, rather than modern ones. They camp the way Daniel Boone did, directly under the stars, or with only a sheet of canvas between them and the elements.

Primitive hunting means choosing side-hammer flintlocks and caplocks over modern firearms. If cartridge guns are used, primitive outdoor enthusiasts opt for those that fire using black powder. Those interested in primitive archery opt for long bows and recurves, and put in the time and effort it takes to become proficient with them. Crossbow users choose arms without wheels and cables, opting, instead, for a simple stave and single string.

Primitive campers have the same frame of mind. They use equipment that was common in the 18th and 19th centuries, depending more on their self-sufficiency than their gear. They cook over open fires rather than cookstoves. Often enough their equipment is homemade, using hand tools.

It may sound as though I’m putting a value judgment on these things. And, in one sense, I am. Personally, I prefer the primitive to the modern. That’s why I was so drawn to historic reenacting. It’s one of the reasons I prefer primitive hunting and use flintlock rifles and caplock shotguns as often as possible.

My preferences aside, however, I am not being judgmental. As I’ve said before, we all make are own choices. And anyone, no matter what that choice, who approaches the outdoors in an ethical manner, is more than welcome. There is nothing that makes one way of enjoying the outdoors better or worse than another way.

What I’m trying to do, however, is come up with an extensional definition of “primitive.” You’re more than welcome to agree or disagree. And I’d like to hear from you either way (brook@the-outdoor-sports-advisor.com). But the stories that appear here will meet my definition of primitive.

So that’s what you can expect to see here. An exploration of primitive hunting arms and activities the way they are practiced in the modern world, and how they were done in the past.