This is a very interseting question but the responses are even more interesting. I' ve been bowhunting since 1966 when there were no compounds being used at all. They were first approved for hunting in 1970. As you look at you data you notice the first significant jump in success in 1974 and that' s about the time the bow companies launched their initial push towards the compounds, everybody had to have one. As you watch the steady incline in success it is nearly all attributed to technology advances. Yes there are more deer and there are more bowhunters but more hunters doesn' t mean higher success rates. If you buy 10 bowhunting videos today 99.9% of those in the video will be using compounds and sights, why? It isn' t because they all love them so much it' s because they are more efficient shot after shot. More efficient translates into..it' s much easier for anybody to put a sight pin on the lung area of a deer and trip a trigger than it is to get to the same point using heavy recurves and longbows. This doesn' t mean it' s a better or worse way to hunt it just means that it' s easier and the video people want to get the kill on the video and move on, so do most hunters.

I owned an archery shop that had indoor lanes and I sold compounds. So I took an entire season and hunted with the latest compound for the time with sights. I hunted New York, West Virginia and Pennsylvania. I had 3 deer that I wanted come within 25 yds. and I shot 3 arrows killing 3 deer. Of those 3, 2 of them would have had to move into a different location for me to have killed them with my longbow but since I was using a compound with sights I had no problem putting the pin on and killing them. Now, I hunt for the main purpose of killing the animal I' m after but I like taking the entire year keeping my accuracy honed to do it with equipment that is much harder to master. That doesn' t make my way better or worse either.

Yes, technology has made the difference in success rates and the average hunter couldn' t stand to let a buck walk just because of equipment limitations.