Originally Posted by teedub31

Recovery rate is all well and good especially from the PR side. But what really need to be evaluated is the success rate of killing a deer (recovered or not).

Originally Posted by fshafly2

teedub31
How are you defining "success rate"?

-fsh

Originally Posted by vadeer

I am working on deer herd management research, specifically on the effectiveness of bow hunting as a deer management tool and recovery rates. A few decades ago there was a non-scientific survey conducted (I think it was the Camp Ripley) that suggests deer recovery rates for bow hunting were 50%. This number is unrealistically low in my personal experience. Within the last few years, I recall reading an article debunking that survey. Can anyone recall or point me to such an article or an updated study? I have the Indian Head, Md. article "Wounding Rates of WTD with Modern Archery Equipment."

Thanks.

Originally Posted by cptleo1

I will probably get flamed for this, but, a man has to do what he has to do.

I think all of these surveys have one major flaw, they assume the hunters are telling the truth about the # of shots taken.

I think forums like these are NOT a good source of information on this subject.

I notice that many of the guys that responded to this question have 700 to 5000 posts and over 20 yrs experience.

Guys like this usually have thousands of dollars in equipment, shoot several times a week year round.

This is NOT your typical (unfortunately) bow hunter.

I believe there are close to 3,000,000 bow licenses sold yearly and the respondents here are in the top tier of our sport.

I think the AVERAGE bow hunter out there shoots 3-4 times a year a just before season, has a bow that has been sitting in the closet for 11 months, is way out of tune and is a member of 'brown is down mentality'.

These guys hunt 2-3 weekends a year, just to get an extended season.

Go to Walmart, Bass Pro,Cabelas the night before opening day and watch and listen to 'bow hunters' there.

It is heartbreaking.

Go to a public WMA and watch the guys coming out of the woods - mismatched arrows, 5 year old broad heads that have never been sharpened, sights with the adjustment screws rusted tight - borrowed equipment - Blah, Blah, Blah.

These guys knowledge about range estimation, effective range, shot placement and tracking is lacking.

I would think these guys recovery rate has got to be less than 33%.

Someone mentioned that recovery rates have gotten better because the equipment has gotten so much better.

That might be so - if you dedicate the time and effort to practice and get proficient with it.

It baffles me, that most states require a hunter safety course for gun hunting and very few have an archery Hunter safety requirement.

I have a friend who is a game warden in TX, he worked for two years on a WMA that was draw hunt only (a very hard hunt to draw).

Part of the requirements for this hunt - You had to hit a 7" pie plate 3 out of 5 @25yds with broad head tipped arrows.

The guys who drew this hunt knew for months that they got the hunt.

You get two tries to qualify = 40% failure rate!

Sad - very sad.

Not to be bashing the bow hunters exclusively the Orange Army is no better -

I think the solution to this problem lies with the better Bow hunters out there.

All of us know these fair weather hunters and need to drag these guys (kicking and screaming if need be) to the range during the summer, maybe a few 3D shoots.

We need to get these guys out there and get them practicing some more, at least thinking about bow hunting and preaching ethics.

We the hunters need to police our own and make the sport better for all.

Then and only then can we get the recovery rates to where the need to be.

I don't mean to come off as anti-hunting.

I harvested my first buck in 1964 - I practiced for a year and a half with that old Ben Pearson re-curve before my uncle was satisfied that I was proficient enough to hunt.

I have harvested over 150 game animals - I lost more animals in the first 5 years than in the next 30.

Hunting is a skill that requires training and practice to become proficient.

That 70% harvest rate someone mentioned sounded pretty good till I ran the numbers - If you hit 150 deer in your career - 45 would have hobbled off wounded, to die later - I know we can do better.

I have read many of the wounding reports - new and old - and I believe the spread goes from 15 - 85% - This spread alone leads me to believe that they are not statistically viable.

It is up the guys that have acquired the skills necessary to be a good bow hunter are OBLIGATED to pass it on.

This is the only way we can defeat the Anti's and grow our sport in a responsible way.

Sorry this got so long, but

I was raised with a simple mantra "The only one who suffers when we make a mistake hunting, is the deer"

Originally Posted by cptleo1

That 70% harvest rate someone mentioned sounded pretty good till I ran the numbers - If you hit 150 deer in your career - 45 would have hobbled off wounded, to die later

Originally Posted by cptleo1

I have read many of the wounding reports - new and old - and I believe the spread goes from 15 - 85% - This spread alone leads me to believe that they are not statistically viable.