Bowhunters - not a big impact?

[Mountain Mule]

The wounding loss from both bows and rifles is absolutely insane. From the research I've read and the stats I've seen there is about 50% wounding loss with archery AND rifle equipment. To put blame on the equipment type is flawed, in my eyes. It's all about taking ethical shots and preparing for that shot during the off-season. Programs that have put effort into continuing hunter education and training have proven to significantly reduce the wounding loss of animals in both rifle AND archery. I believe as hunters we must push these programs (master hunter, precision rifle courses, etc) and be willing to teach others how to hunt ethically within out community.

Edit: obviously mistakes will happen and situations will sometimes dissolve and some wounding loss will happen. But we can dramatically reduce it with the shots we take and the education/tool we provide to teach people better habits

I've known bowhunters that have wounded an animal or three in a single season. I've also seen rifle hunters do the same in a single morning... the man who wounded 3 bucks in a morning told me he didnt hit any of them when i approached him. I saw blood from my glassing knob on two of them, the third went over the ridge and bedded in a way that made it apparent he was wounded. I often believe most rifle hunter will chalk a bad shot up to a 'clean-miss' so we hear less about these events. The equipment is only as good/ethical as the hunter who wields it.

 

[rjthehunter]

An off placed arrow might kill a bull in 24 hours whereas a bullet in the same location might kill it in 2 minutes. That fact alone means we're likely looking at more lost and dead bulls per hunter in archery than in rifle.

There are no official stats to say objectively one way or the other that i'm aware of. But my mind is made up on the matter.

The real rub, for me, is not who has a greater impact, necessarily, it's that archers have a tendency to be in full blown denial that they have negative impacts on elk herds. They are sooooo ethical and moral, after all

What about all the long range shooters that shoot, then don't go look because they think they missed? Or long range shooters who graze the animal? A higher percentage of hunters are rifle hunters. If you don't think they do more damage, you might be confused.

but, let's be very honest - I think a lot of folks these days are specifically attracted to archery because it is harder and that rolls into ethics for them. I've met several people personally that don't think rifle hunting is "sporting" and therefore choose to do archery and absolutely have stated they think it's superior from that standpoint.

Personally, I like archery better for a few reasons. It's more challenging, longer seasons, you end up being up close and personal with the animals, and it's more rewarding to harvest something with a bow to me. It has nothing to do with "being superior" to rifle hunters. I rifle hunt too. I just prefer archery.

 

[TOGIE]

It has nothing to do with "being superior" to rifle hunters. I rifle hunt too. I just prefer archery.

oh yeah, i've heard that line before.

 

[Rie Bread]

Tldr-
compound bows should have the second 3 weeks of archery season and the purest traditional bow hunter should have the front 3 weeks

 

[Dubz337]

Personally, I like archery better for a few reasons. It's more challenging, longer seasons, you end up being up close and personal with the animals, and it's more rewarding to harvest something with a bow to me. It has nothing to do with "being superior" to rifle hunters. I rifle hunt too. I just prefer archery.

Hmmmm

 

[FREAK]

but, let's be very honest - I think a lot of folks these days are specifically attracted to archery because it is harder and that rolls into ethics for them. I've met several people personally that don't think rifle hunting is "sporting" and therefore choose to do archery and absolutely have stated they think it's superior from that standpoint.

Perhaps the chip is on my shoulder.

even if, I DGAF. my broad brushed inflammatory views on bowhunters won't be changing anytime soon

Have you ever tried killing a bull on a Montana general season rifle tag? Talk about finding a unicorn. I'm turning a corner on my rifle hunting experience, but for a long time I really felt (and still do believe) it to be easier to kill a bull in archery than rifle. And most of my buddies that hunt both would pick archery if it boiled down to the "easiest" way to harvest a bull.

I have no problem taking a rifle out. Usually do for antelope and MD. If I had elk figured out with a rifle, I would love to spend more time chasing them with snow on the ground and cooler temps.

 

[Treeshark]

Now rifle vs bow is a thing on HT?

I get the point @The Hedgehog is making with the original post, but it seems strange that there are actually people who don’t enjoy doing both.

 

[Bigjay73]

I agree but the whole you drew blood should punch your tag…..I know a guy we refer to as pin cushion outdoors idk if he has punched his tag on a bull with under 3 arrows in it. This thread has kinda gone all over the place im not sure how anyone can argue bow or rifle causes more wounded critters both have there faults and it’s the people.

Would you keep hunting if you hit one in the chest and didn't recover it?

 

[TOGIE]

Have you ever tried killing a bull on a Montana general season rifle tag? Talk about finding a unicorn. I'm turning a corner on my rifle hunting experience, but for a long time I really felt it to be easier to kill a bull in archery than rifle. And most of my buddies that hunt both would pick archery if it boiled down to the "easiest" way to harvest a bull.

I have no problem taking a rifle out. Usually do for antelope and MD. If I had elk figured out with a rifle, I would love to spend more time chasing them with snow on the ground and cooler temps.

in even moderately limited units in colorado a not inexperienced bowhunter will likely have a much much better time getting opportunities than during high quota 1st rifle or otc rifle here.

otc archery though? i can't fathom why people waste the time (other than to stroke that ego ) as you definitely have higher odds on an otc rifle tag i'd say.

i strongly agree with you statement from above. the primary problem is the explosion in archery hunting.

 

[The Hedgehog]

Have you ever tried killing a bull on a Montana general season rifle tag? Talk about finding a unicorn. I'm turning a corner on my rifle hunting experience, but for a long time I really felt (and still do believe) it to be easier to kill a bull in archery than rifle. And most of my buddies that hunt both would pick archery if it boiled down to the "easiest" way to harvest a bull.

I have no problem taking a rifle out. Usually do for antelope and MD. If I had elk figured out with a rifle, I would love to spend more time chasing them with snow on the ground and cooler temps.

Facts.

It's way easier to fill an elk tag on public land in MT in September with a bow, than in OCT/NOV with a rifle. Especially on the older bull elk.

 

[cgasner1]

Would you keep hunting if you hit one in the chest and didn't recover it?

I wouldn’t shoot one in the chest

 

[Bigjay73]

I wouldn’t shoot one in the chest

Imma start calling you triangle

 

[cgasner1]

I edited the last post. I got the 313 unit confused with 301, but the my question on the solution still is valid for these smaller units. But now I'm not sure how 15 bucks got taken in 313.

Clearly FWP has this data. They know when they call who has what tag. They just don't share it on the harvest data site. The harvest data is by unit, not by tag #. I think you question brings up the point of whether or not the 900 tag should even exist in this day and age of hunting. The 007 license could be justified, but 900 is more difficult.

Fwp does not have the data. You can call and ask. I asked at a meeting during the time frame they where breaking the 900 I got looked at like I had a hole in my head when I asked. To me it matters there is a difference between a bull killed on a 21 tag or a 20 tag even though the guys on a le rifle tag can also hunt archery

 

[cgasner1]

Imma start calling you triangle

I wouldn’t cheat punch an elk odds of that shot are low it can be insanely lethal but it’s a piss poor shot. Would I shot a second bull if I had a bad shot on a broadside bull at this point in my life idk would depend on a lot of factors. I’ve done it in the past I might again. That said when my string breaks on my bow I can almost guarantee a punched tag but stuff happens

 

[gouch]

The impact of rifle hunting is hundreds of times greater than that of bowhunting? Hundreds? I don't think that's true anywhere in the lower 48 at this point in time, and certainly not in the case highlighted in the original post.

In the OPs original post, he states that the 900 tags account for 30%-50% of animal harvested. Another way of saying that is that the rifle tags accounted for 50%-70% of animals harvested. I don't know anything about Montana tag allotments, so I did a quick search, and it appears that on average the 900 tags make up around 90% of the tags. More in some units. The 900 tags have a much longer season, so 90% fewer hunters are killing up to 30% more of the antelope even though the bow hunters in a much longer season.

I'm no mathematician and that probably isn't 100 times more impact but that sure is a hell of a lot greater impact. So, I may have exaggerated to make a point but when it comes to impact on wildlife the only thing that comes close to the rifle is habitat destruction and maybe the automobile.

If I made a mistake on those tag allotments go ahead and slap me upside the head. I didn't spend much time on my research.

 

[Bigjay73]

I wouldn’t cheat punch an elk odds of that shot are low it can be insanely lethal but it’s a piss poor shot. Would I shot a second bull if I had a bad shot on a broadside bull at this point in my life idk would depend on a lot of factors. I’ve done it in the past I might again. That said when my string breaks on my bow I can almost guarantee a punched tag but stuff happens

Chest meaning ribcage, meaning lungs and heart, meaning broadside

 

[cgasner1]

Chest meaning ribcage, meaning lungs and heart, meaning broadside

View attachment 336971

Would you take that shot? I see why it says muley freak on it that’s a pretty shitty shot also

 

[cgasner1]

Imma start calling you triangle

I shot that bull about 10 years ago that black dot is the entrance on a super steep downhill shot when the arrow hit I didn’t think that bull would clear 100 yards. The pic was taken 3 days later and about 5 miles from where I shot him. I tried like hell to get another arrow in him. I filled my tag the following day on a different bull

 

[Rie Bread]

I tried like hell to get another arrow in him. I filled my tag the following day on a different bull

kinda of a ewwww thing to say. Especially with the following sentence…

 

[Bigjay73]

Would you take that shot? I see why it says muley freak on it that’s a pretty shitty shot also

Imma take the lack of an actual answer as your answer. And I would wait till it quartered away a bit, was just showing you what I meant by chest there Triangle