Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Archery Forums > Bowhunting
Recovery Rates of Bowhunting Deer >

Recovery Rates of Bowhunting Deer

Bowhunting Talk about the passion that is bowhunting. Share in the stories, pictures, tips, tactics and learn how to be a better bowhunter.

Recovery Rates of Bowhunting Deer

Old 02-06-2010, 06:04 AM
  #11  
Typical Buck
 
fshafly2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanjemoy, MD
Posts: 998
Default

Phil
"Wounding Rates of White-tailed Deer with Modern Archery Equipment" has the statistics with citations for most of the modern bowhunter wounding rate studies, including Wendy Krueger's Camp Ripley Study.

I did not include citations to the older (pre-1989) bowhunter wounding rate studies in the paper, because I make the argument that these older studies are obsolete due to the advances in the materials and design of archery equipment. However, I can provide you citations for 19 older bowhunter studies if you want them - pm me.

The Animal Rights (AR) crowd criticized the Camp Ripley Study in their discussion groups, but I never found a formal citation. Typical AR criticisms include that the study was funded by the archery manufacturers ("funding bias"), that not all hunters were surveyed (sampling bias), and that the abnormally high hunter density facilitated deer recovery.

Anecdotal stories of bowhunters' successes or failures to recover game are interesting, but it would be difficult to draw any conclusions from these accounts.

- Andy Pedersen
fshafly2 is offline  
Old 02-14-2010, 04:01 PM
  #12  
Fork Horn
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 295
Default

Originally Posted by fshafly2
Phil
"Wounding Rates of White-tailed Deer with Modern Archery Equipment" has the statistics with citations for most of the modern bowhunter wounding rate studies, including Wendy Krueger's Camp Ripley Study.

I did not include citations to the older (pre-1989) bowhunter wounding rate studies in the paper, because I make the argument that these older studies are obsolete due to the advances in the materials and design of archery equipment. However, I can provide you citations for 19 older bowhunter studies if you want them - pm me.

The Animal Rights (AR) crowd criticized the Camp Ripley Study in their discussion groups, but I never found a formal citation. Typical AR criticisms include that the study was funded by the archery manufacturers ("funding bias"), that not all hunters were surveyed (sampling bias), and that the abnormally high hunter density facilitated deer recovery.

Anecdotal stories of bowhunters' successes or failures to recover game are interesting, but it would be difficult to draw any conclusions from these accounts.

- Andy Pedersen
Thanks, Andy. I did read somewhere, and I need to find that again, that the AR crowd had an opportunity to help fund Camp Ripley Study, but decided not to in order to the keep "bias" defense as a viable option.

BTW - Nice job on your study.
vadeer is offline  
Old 02-15-2010, 11:13 AM
  #13  
Nontypical Buck
 
rankbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,296
Default

Originally Posted by MeanV2
Good Post!!

I can't remember the last animal I shot personally and was Not able to find.


Dan
Unfortunately I still can, two years ago I shot/brought home 6 does, and lost 2. I had not lost a deer in almost 10 years. I don't think I will ever forget that sick feeling. It did though force me to try even harder to be the best hunter/archer I can be. I will always strive to never have to go through that again.
rankbull is offline  
Old 02-16-2010, 10:48 AM
  #14  
Giant Nontypical
 
MeanV2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location:
Posts: 7,367
Default

Originally Posted by rankbull
Unfortunately I still can, two years ago I shot/brought home 6 does, and lost 2. I had not lost a deer in almost 10 years. I don't think I will ever forget that sick feeling. It did though force me to try even harder to be the best hunter/archer I can be. I will always strive to never have to go through that again.
I think we all go through that sooner or later if we Bowhunt long enough and kill enough animals.

Like you said it can be a learning experience.

Dan
MeanV2 is offline  
Old 02-17-2010, 08:17 AM
  #15  
Giant Nontypical
 
Western MA Hunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Western Massachusetts
Posts: 7,168
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Siman08/OH
I made a post like this a few years ago and it was shot down fast (real fast)

But ill throw out some info:

Ive killed 5 deer with a bow, and not recovered 2. 5/7 for 71%


I am at the same exact numbers.

That sounds about right... i've lost 3 of 18 or so.
Western MA Hunter is offline  
Old 02-17-2010, 10:10 AM
  #16  
Fork Horn
 
cptleo1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location:
Posts: 304
Default

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"
cptleo1 is offline  
Old 02-17-2010, 03:29 PM
  #17  
Nontypical Buck
 
kwilson16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Burke, VA (raised in MD)
Posts: 1,096
Default Great Post!

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"
Great Post!
kwilson16 is offline  
Old 02-17-2010, 03:36 PM
  #18  
Giant Nontypical
 
MeanV2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location:
Posts: 7,367
Default

Originally Posted by kwilson16
Great Post!
Yep! and unfortunately it's very True as well!

Dan
MeanV2 is offline  
Old 02-17-2010, 07:08 PM
  #19  
Nontypical Buck
 
1shotkill1993's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Roanoke, Virginia
Posts: 2,335
Default

Are you going to take into account the people that dont search as hard and thorough as others? How would you seperate those numbers out.

Just a thought....anyways. My personal numbers are 3 deer shot with a bow. 2 recovered. 2/3.
1shotkill1993 is offline  
Old 02-18-2010, 05:52 AM
  #20  
Typical Buck
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 564
Default

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). I am thinking that the success rate for the bowhunting public is around 25%. Not a very high success rate for a program that is dependent on you being successful.
teedub31 is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.