I have had this debate with my boss a few times now and here it is. He says that deer hunting is not a challange anymore like it was 40 years ago. He tells me of how they had to go out and climb trees by hand and be in the field for days and days. He speaks of very hard physical work. He also critisizes the use of all the high tech equiptment now days (rangefinders, high powered scopes, most everything you can think of that they didn't have back then). My arguement to him is this. Back in those days, the land wasn't broken up near as much as it is now. he had thousands of acres to hunt where now it is hundreds of 100 acre plots. There are more hunters out there with high tech equiptment that we now have to compete with on top of trying to outsmart a big buck. With the equiptment currently on the market, I am willing to give him that it is easier to harvest a deer today comparted to back then (not saying it's easier to get a big one), but is it really easier? That does not even go into the amount of money involved compared to 40 years ago.

All of the equipment in the world still isn't a substitute for actual hunting intelligence and ability.

Without a doubt it is easier today than it was 40 years ago. The fact is, it is easier today than it was 25 years ago when I started. The equipment is one huge factor, but also look at the advancements we have today with scent elimination. I understand your point about there being more land back then, but you also have to remember that there is more deer today. Just about all the States have done a great job about managing heards, not to mention what all the hunters are doing as well. With year around food plots, we have healthier deer today with less winter kill off. I look at people passing on 120-130 inch deer today and I am just amazed. Let's not forget that those are P&Y book deer and we let them walk. I hate to tell you this, but I think your boss is going to win this one.

Depends on who you talk to and the areas. Take rural PA 40 years ago and you hear stories of 100's of deer seen per day. Not real hard to shoot one when you see that many. Now listen to those same guys and they may see 5 deer all season.

I would guess in most places/cases it is much easier now, but not all.

much, much easier today

My grandfather told me a story once that I will share, it happened in S. Arkansas during the 1940's

My grandfather was still a young man. He, his brother, and his father were plowing the fields in preperation of the winter crops. Their closest neighbor came riding up in their horse drawn buggy and told them that they had spotted TWO (2) sets of deer tracks in their field. The neighbors, along with my grandfather, his brother, and his father packed their sacks full of food and sleeping gear and set out after the two deer.....based on two sets of tracks. They ended being gone for three days, sleeping under the stars and eating whatever they brought in their sacks and never saw a deer. I guess I had a puzzled look on my face because he said that back then, two deer would be like a free side of beef, split between two families and they determined it was worth the effort to go after them.

Yep, and those were the "good ole days" if you ask most PA hunters

Thats a no brainier ,it has to be easier today.

Forty years ago Bow tech wasn't even a pipe dream ,and a Rage was party.[]

And look what happened to the Indians,they never had a chance in hell of surviving with those wooden bows & old stone broad heads.

Wait...what about the butt-out?

I am still skeptical. I would much rather have full access to 2 or 3 thousand acres and head out hunting than sitting in a stand to hear deer feeders going off on all sides of my hunting property with 100 yards. I see the points ya'll are making, but also still think I have a pretty good arguement. And maybe I'm to young (30) and jelous of how it used to be when I wasn't around to enjoy it.

The lack of a buffalo size Butt out toolcould have only hastened the demise of the first American hunters.[]