TeacherRo:

A long time ago before compound bows became so common place and preferred, I saw a program about a bow hunter that went to Africa. In one of the scenes they showed him shooting at a compressed thatch target. He was using a laminated recurve bow whose draw weight was like a "gazillion" pounds or so. His arrows went through the target like it wasn't even there. The local natives had bows taller than they were and arrows that approached the length of spears that just barely stuck into the target. They may not have been able to shoot elephants or other thick skinned game, but they still brought home the bacon.

In Wisconsin, you have to use a minimum draw weight bow of 30 lbs for hunting deer. Most people use more, and a 50 lb. draw seems to be the most popular hereabouts. The last time I looked, Wisconsin does not allow smaller than .30 caliber firearms for hunting deer and I do not know if they have minimum barrel lengths for handgun hunting.

My friends and I are old timers whose hunting dates before the popularity of tree stands and we grew up with recurve bows. I preferred ground hunting back when I was still able to move around in the woods as sitting in a tree stand is boring as hell and you don't learn much about animal movements.

I own a Sheakspear & Bear laminated recurves, a solid fiberglas backup, and a Bear compound bow. The Shakespear has sights on it as does the Bear compound. I prefer recurves in general, which, along with straight bows, and solid figerglas bows offer me one advantage I feel is lacking in a compound. "Snap shooting" a compound bow the way I learned to "snap shoot" a "regular" bow is asking for a dislocated shoulder. Compounds are easier to hold back for the long aimed shot, and crossbows are just short of being firearms, but given the choice of owning just one bow, it would be a laminated fiberglas recurve.

You don't need 150 lbs of draw weight to kill anything in North America if you have sharp, well designed arrows.

Good luck!

Bountyhunter