Long Range hunting versus bowhunting wound loss rates?

[ftrovato]

My last bow kill , was perfect double lung , and it got into the heavy brush and cactus
Left him overnight and my wife’s wiener dog was turned loose on the trail the next morning, and luckily the coyotes and hogs hadn’t found him and the wiener dogs did
I gave up on bow hunting after that

I'm on the same page.

I had so many friends calling me out after dark or early in the morning to help them look for wounded deer that I decided to start telling them to stop calling me since I was giving up the sport.

I can go dove hunting instead... ;-)

 

[skydiver386]

My last bow kill , was perfect double lung , and it got into the heavy brush and cactus
Left him overnight and my wife’s wiener dog was turned loose on the trail the next morning, and luckily the coyotes and hogs hadn’t found him and the wiener dogs did
I gave up on bow hunting after that

I gotta get me one of these!

 

[deewayne2003]

I spent this entire weekend guiding bow hunters and it's such a pain that I've sworn it off after having 6 deer hit and only 3 recovered and one of those was only recovered because buzzards located it for us.

I haven't lost a deer bow hunting, but I limit my shots to 20ish yards and even then I've had some interesting recoveries with boiler room hits, when mortally wounded deer decide to smite me by running off the side of a cliff before they die.

Every time that happens I'm reminded of what an old Choctaw Indian told me many years ago while we were practicing with our bows.......

"When Indians found out about rifles they quit this shit!"

 

[HankBuck]

I respect and agree with all your points. But for me, to many variables with an arrow moving at 300 fps compared to a rifle bullet at 2500 fps or a pistol bullet at 1000 fps. So I stick with rifle or pistol. I've considered a now legal cross bow in my area but haven't made the leap (yet).

@ftrovato you’re right about the “variables” w/a Bow.
I’ve had similar experience Hangun hunting deer —only taken one deer w/a handgun - small Doe, easy 30 yrd shot broadside and aimed S&W 629 w/5” barrel & open sights behind shoulder But—- HIT the Neck ! …was off my aim by a foot and lucky to have dropped it dead - guess I’m Not much of a threat with a handgun.
I don’t crossbow hunt - yet, saving that for when I get older and can’t draw a real Bow. I don’t believe you get any real “killing” advantage with a Crossbow but it requires less skill to place your shot on target and most find they get an additional 10-20 yards more range with more consistent accuracy. The big advantage is you don’t need to draw or make any “movement” with a cross bow (No draw for deer to see) and can ‘hold’ your aim as long as needed until good shot angle presented. Still if you only hit only liver or one lung = long tracking job and less blood to follow, could result in a lost-but-dead-deer.. While I really like Bow hunting - I’m Not a “dedicated” bow hunter and only use a bow to get an early crack at the deer - switch to MZ/rifle or shotgun just as soon those seasons open and then immediately put the bow away until the next year. I did want to start Handgun hunting but only with Open Sights and based on my one deer taken so far - I’m less then impressive with a handgun so I might lay off of that for awhile. Try a crossbow, most States allow them and give you an earlier season for big game, they are very easy to learn and highly effective

 

[BJH65]

Yes I archery hunt and no I have not wounded and lost an animal perhaps because I haven't killed near the amount of animals as I have with a firearm and I won’t take a shot unless I’m 100% sure. My own personal standards are 40 yards for elk and 30 yards for deer although I routinely practice out to 50 and 60 yards and can reliably place my arrows in the vitals at those distances, still I’m paranoid about wounding one and I want to be sure.

Still hunting elk in western montana with a bow was both a humbling and rewarding experience back when we lived there. It made me a better hunter and less concerned about killing when it would be so easy with a rifle.

Reading some of the commentary about hunters littering the forest with wounded deer stuck like pin cushions, clearly some hunters have no business picking up a bow and going hunting, a lot of dumbassery taking place. The bow hunters that I personally know routinely practice, use the correct archery tackle and probably passed on a truckload of game during their hunting career because they couldn’t be certain of their shot. They only take the shot when they are certain and make humane kills. None of them hunt with a gun anymore.

 

[Sjdb243]

Interesting topic for sure. I sell firearms and hear more than my share of stories, half truths and lies behind the gun counter. I’ve never bow hunted, gave the thing away when I realized how perishable the skill was, as well as how much I like fine rifles. This season I’ve heard another handful of wounded and lost animal stories from bow hunters, who proceed to go out and cut tags in rifle season, while blaming poor wildlife management and wolves for the lack of bucks

My feeling is that I should use a tool that gives me the most effective method of killing and recovering the animal I want to hunt… however this weekend I’ll be taking my iron sighted rifle out instead of one of my many scoped rifles, that no doubt I can shoot better - does that make me a hypocrite? Probably.

I will be limiting my ranges to what I’ve trained on and am very confident in a good hit - but I know in the heat of the moment, after days of failure the temptation to stretch that confident range will be there, and I’ll have a 7 PRC with a good scope nearby for when that time comes.

I think the bow leads to guys stretching their abilities to fit the situation, by nature of how difficult it can be to close to that sweet spot to where confidence is backed by ability. No doubt the same thing happens with extended ranges with a rifle.

In my location, the community I am in, and the opportunities we have here, I tend to find myself thinking that guys who are intentionally taking a shorter ranged tool out, then wounding and losing game are doing so out of some kind of ego driven motivation. If you’re set on using a how, use it when you know it will work effectively. Where I live bow seasons are by significantly greater than rifle seasons, so I’m particularly frustrated by hearing about deer wounded at 50 yards with a bow, when most folks would have killed the same animal with a rifle and be eating it, not feeding the coyotes.

I mean no offence to anyone who bow hunts, I’m speaking only to my experiences, and I know there are absolutely many folk here who are better hunters than I. Like all things in life people are a diverse bunch, and my frustrations may well be driven by a minority rather than the majority of bow hunters.

Maybe part of the number of lost game heard about with a bow vs with a rifle is that the bow hunting community has accepted this and made it’s discussion less taboo (rightly or wrongly), and the rifle folks aren’t as ready to talk about it, even if the prevalence is there?

 

[RedTag]

I have wounded and lost game, and ALL of those have been with shotguns. Mostly waterfowl with the dismally performing steel shot, and once a turkey many years ago that I still struggle to explain. Haven’t yet lost anything hit with a rifle (or handgun) but I have not taken any shot beyond that comfortable 300 yard mark. I have been into archery since I was a kid but never hunted with it. I try to be honest with myself when it comes to my own abilities and realistic expectations so I know I would have to set a reasonable limit of 20-25 yards for bow hunting. And for me the juice hasn’t been worth the squeeze. That may change as the hunting seasons that allow firearms are getting so short and crowded and in some cases closed altogether due to low game numbers. Sure some guys are hunting with bows because of their pure passion but most get into it simply to have the opportunity to hunt that has largely been lost in regular season firearms hunts. Case in point I live in Fairbanks Alaska and the local caribou rifle hunt (40 mile herd) didn’t even open as planned this year because the managers were worried about over harvest. By contrast a guy can take his bow and arrows up the haul road and have the option to take multiple caribou in a season that lasts months instead of weeks or days. The catch is you'll be hunting an area with little concealment and shots are likely to be 50 yards or more. Suffice to say wounded game is a certainty. Back to the rifle hunt and there are many instances of animals wounded by guys shooting past their ability and often with kit that hasn’t even been dialed in or tested. Either way the bottom line is we owe it to ourselves, each other, and the game we hunt to be prepared and to do our best work. Obviously this is easier said than done. This is a very interesting topic as so often we hear complaints against the long range rifle hunters for being unethical yet archery is regarded as a somehow more pure and ethical pursuit despite the same fundamental principles needing to be called into question either way.

 

[Muskox]

A friend of mine in Alaska used to guide bear hunters, he was a registered guide. You have to have a few years in each species to get to the master guide qualification.

He made archery hunters sign a disclaimer that if the animal was getting away or it got dangerous he was going to fire his rifle. Without warning.

Another guy I heard of quit guiding archery hunters for bears, as they didn't want back up unless it got hairy. Who decides that?

 

[Flbt]

A friend of mine in Alaska used to guide bear hunters, he was a registered guide. You have to have a few years in each species to get to the master guide qualification.

He made archery hunters sign a disclaimer that if the animal was getting away or it got dangerous he was going to fire his rifle. Without warning.

Another guy I heard of quit guiding archery hunters for bears, as they didn't want back up unless it got hairy. Who decides that?

Who decides?
The guide

 

[HankBuck]

Who decides?
The guide

@Flbt - you are correct and Alaska Guides will also put a bullet into a Rifle-wounded-Grizzly if they think it may escape or become a danger. Hunters usually have discussions with the Guide “before” their hunt starts so that All understand when their Guide may shoot. For a Bow Hunter going after Alaskan Griz - if a bullet is put into the animal it can’t be entered into Pope & Young record books….but preventing a wounded Griz from getting away is more important.
My Guide in Alaska (on a Spring rifle Griz hunt) )told me that some of his Clients “Want” the Guide to shoot immediately after they do - regardless of if the bear is wounded or escaping. I discussed with my guide that I did “Not” want him to shoot my Bear unless absolutely necessary (wounded/escaping etc..) and He agreed. I found it interesting that some Hunters don’t really care who’s bullet kills the Bear and would want their Guide to shoot “immediately” - that would ruin that Trophy experience for Me BUT - if I made a bad shot then I’d also want the Guide to shoot if needed because Nothing is worse then wounding & losing an animal…plus the “bad shot” would be MY Fault and I would have to accept my Guided was needed/required to finish that Bear off…Still, I would not like that and would Not be proud of any animal that required two shooters to kill it but I understand it is needed.
On the plus side - I’d save a lot of money Not getting that animal mounted, maybe just a tanned hide to save and remind me to Make-a-bettter-shot next time.

 

[mrpoindexter]

So I went through my hunting records for all animals shot and tallied up a list for bow hunting on:

Clean kills / rifle assist / lost. Over the course of 14 hunting trips where I have actually fired off an arrow or more at one or more animals and came up with:

44 Animals with clean archery kills. 28 were single arrow kills. Many of the multiple arrow kills were animals that would have died from the first arrow, but I fired another arrow or two in order to speed up the process. I do not count shooting already dead animals for proof/insurance as a second arrow shot.

9 animals requiring rifle assistance. One of those was to stop a charge after a lethal shot (a Savanah lioness).

8 animals lost, which I can detail below:
#1: Zebra - perfect shot - not perfect gear on my first safari.
#2-4: Grysbok (string jump - one drop of blood found from superficial wound), Baboon (liver shot, never found), Gemsbok (just slightly behind lungs in fading light) all on the same safari, along with 6 single shot kills and one un-needed rifle assist shot in the ass on my mortally wounded giraffe from an overly "helpful" PH who didn't want me to lose my trophy). (A side note - I have seen many rifle hunting guides who behave this way and are quick to shoot an animal to anchor it. None of my guides who bow hunt have ever done this, while I have had about half my "finished with a rifle" animals not really needing a rifle assist)
#5: Bush pig - shot at night. went off to his den and died there. Could never find him
#6: Genet - shot and certainly killed but didn't track it as we were waiting for a honey badger. After recovering the badger, could't find the genet. next day, decided it was likely eaten overnight by predators
#7: Hyena - wounded and bedded down in tall grass. Lost track. Certainly died from wound, likely in its den.
#8: Balearan Boc - bad shot - lost him trying to track him. Not sure if it was lethal or not, but he was moving very well.

In all, it was as follows:
13% lost animal rate (half of those in the first year of my 9-year hunting "career")
15% shot and finished with a rifle (almost half of those in my first year of hunting)
72% clean archery kills, with nearly 2/3 of those being single arrow kills and currently on a 7 animal single arrow kill streak.

 

[Hogpatrol]

Back in the mid '60s before compound bows were legal, I lost the first deer I shot at. This was with a bare stick bow and fiberglass arrows. Since crossbows were legalized, have killed several with no losses.

 

[375Ruger416]

Interesting topic to be sure. I appreciate that we are able to have a constructive discussion about it.

 

[farmer_john]

Aaron from Gunwerks made the comment on a podcast recently that long range hunters get a lot of flack for wounding animals, but bowhunters seem to talk about it as a right of passage and an acceptable problem set.

My follow on question would be do you punch your tag in North America, after you can't find it for several days?

I have never lost anything I have shot at. But i also pass on shots that are not a good shot.

And I think thats more of the issue for wounding. Is people are
1 operating outside their skillset and thereby taking bad shots.
Or 2 just taking a shot because the opprotunity is there regardless of the quality of the shot. They just see a nice animal and let one rip.

Long range shooting is a great example lot of dudes are getting 6.5 creedmores. Because its the newest fad long range rifle but few actually practice shooting long range and the requisite sub skills like reading wind, angle fire ect. And thus make bad shots because they dont have the skills to make a good one.

 

[375Ruger416]

I have never lost anything I have shot at. But i also pass on shots that are not a good shot.

And I think thats more of the issue for wounding. Is people are
1 operating outside their skillset and thereby taking bad shots.
Or 2 just taking a shot because the opprotunity is there regardless of the quality of the shot. They just see a nice animal and let one rip.

Long range shooting is a great example lot of dudes are getting 6.5 creedmores. Because its the newest fad long range rifle but few actually practice shooting long range and the requisite sub skills like reading wind, angle fire ect. And thus make bad shots because they dont have the skills to make a good one.

And don’t know their own and their weapons limits.

A 6.5 CM is a good example. Very accurate, easy to shoot well, but does not have enough retained velocity and and frontal area at distance for good terminal performance IMO. Which is why it’s an ok elk cartridge on cows and spike bulls at 200 yds and in, but not on bigger animals or out past 300. It’s easy to bang steel with it out to long distance but that doesn’t mean you can make the shot when the animal of your dreams walks out in field conditions. Also doesn’t mean the cartridge your shooting has enough terminal performance either.

On the other hand, I’m not a big fan of shooting moving game even at close distances. I think there is a real risk of wounding and losing an animal just as with long range shooting. For my money, an unaware animal at moderate range is the best of all worlds.

As of yet, I have not wounded or lost an animal. I practice a lot, limit my shots and have passed up marginal shots. It also probably reflects that I am relatively inexperienced and am due for a bad experience. The closest I’ve come to missing was a bullet that deflected off a small branch I couldn’t see near the impala I was shooting at about 100 yds. I was aiming at the shoulder at the bullet went in the neck sideways. Luckily, it was DRT.

 

[farmer_john]

And don’t know their own and their weapons limits.

A 6.5 CM is a good example. Very accurate, easy to shoot well, but does not have enough retained velocity and and frontal area at distance for good terminal performance IMO. Which is why it’s an ok elk cartridge on cows and spike bulls at 200 yds and in, but not on bigger animals or out past 300. It’s easy to bang steel with it out to long distance but that doesn’t mean you can make the shot when the animal of your dreams walks out in field conditions. Also doesn’t mean the cartridge your shooting has enough terminal performance either.

On the other hand, I’m not a big fan of shooting moving game even at close distances. I think there is a real risk of wounding and losing an animal just as with long range shooting. For my money, an unaware animal at moderate range is the best of all worlds.

As of yet, I have not wounded or lost an animal. I practice a lot, limit my shots and have passed up marginal shots. It also probably reflects that I am relatively inexperienced and am due for a bad experience. The closest I’ve come to missing was a bullet that deflected off a small branch I couldn’t see near the impala I was shooting at about 100 yds. I was aiming at the shoulder at the bullet went in the neck sideways. Luckily, it was DRT.

Id say the terminal ballistics are not the issue. Even at 800m it has the energy to take out deer sized game and elk.

Most of my shooting experience is not big game. But same rules apply. My advice for a new shooter would be. Practice shooting off odd angles and positions in addition to standing kneeling and prone and things not just sticks bipods or tripods. (Prs matches can be good in that area) and if you have the ability practice angle fire. (Up down) and windage ability to read wind/mirage is one of the most imortant and hardest to master skills in LRS.

That said. Theres no honor in taking a bad shot and just causing needless suffering.
And regardless of experience level passing on a shot your not 100% on is the more noble and humane thing to do.

 

[Surgeon1]

I've hunted elk since I was 8yo (and after 62years still hunting elk, did yesterday) My dad ran an outfitting operation in CO for 31 years for elk and mule deer ending in 1982, Compound bows were just getting "perfected", we ran rifle camps but as Colorado started allowing muzzleloaders and bow seasons my dad opened up to allow some early rut hunts with each. the smokepoles were mostly Hawken's in 50 &54 caliber many made from cheap kits. They were surprisingly effective,with virtually no elk lost that I recall. They did 5 years of compound bow hunter (about 5 per yr), also in the rut, so shots were in the same general range of 10-max 50 yds. Essentially the same general conditions and guides as with the muzzleloaders. With losses of over 50% with the bow hunters my dad & his partner pulled the plug on Archery hunts. He told me only a few years later that there were more elk lost by their group with the 25 or so bow hunters than in 31 years of rifle hunts with 60 or mor hunters per year.
Fast forward for me I gave up archery elk and deer after losing one of each. Then just a little more than 15y ago I met a group in Oregon and took up the sport of long-range. It was soon adapted to elk hunting and for several years hunted in a horse came in western WY and then NM & UT and I still employ the techniques here where I live.
After years of giving up archery and on a trip to SCI I developed an interest in new high-tech crossbows! Looked at the 3 available options at the show and bought 2 Raven 25's at the show and within a couple weeks they showed up with all the accessories. I set them up and practiced with them for 7mo. I was absolutely amazed at the accuracy, and my first use was a local antelope at 46y who dropped in his tracks (bolt was found in the dirt more than 100y past him). Couple weeks later went to
the "long Range " camp in western WY and shot a nice 6x6 elk (320). I've taken 7 elk with those bows (5-55y) none have gone more than 30yds.
I've killed multiple elk in several states with my long-range skills and have yet to lose one. I consider a lost animal one that you don't recover in 24hours. Three elk have been taken mid to late in the day at ranges that made recovery impossible until the next morning.

 

[RedTag]

Aaron from Gunwerks made the comment on a podcast recently that long range hunters get a lot of flack for wounding animals, but bowhunters seem to talk about it as a right of passage and an acceptable problem set.

My follow on question would be do you punch your tag in North America, after you can't find it for several days?

Another angle from which to ponder this question is considering the long range hunter can, in most cases, get closer and thus lessen that chance of game being wounded and lost. But if a bow hunter were able to close the gap much more he may as well skip the arrow and kill the game with a scimitar or a halberd. Arrows can kill only via mechanical wounding. Bullets from modern high velocity rifles can (can, not necessarily always will) impart instant shock. From ye olde English to the Ubangi, all people previously reliant on Stone Age weapons technology have readily accepted the advent of firearms. And for good reason.

 

[revturbo9967]

I’ve lost a couple while bow hunting, whether bad shots or the animal ducked at the sound of the shot. I’d say far more animals are lost bow hunting . I’d also say far more animals are poached with archery equipment than firearms in North America. More willing to take a risky shot when nobody can hear it

 

[mrpoindexter]

Another angle from which to ponder this question is considering the long range hunter can, in most cases, get closer and thus lessen that chance of game being wounded and lost. But if a bow hunter were able to close the gap much more he may as well skip the arrow and kill the game with a scimitar or a halberd. Arrows can kill only via mechanical wounding. Bullets from modern high velocity rifles can (can, not necessarily always will) impart instant shock. From ye olde English to the Ubangi, all people previously reliant on Stone Age weapons technology have readily accepted the advent of firearms. And for good reason.

I think a major difference is the ease of follow up shots with a rifle, as opposed to a bow. Animals on the run at 100+ yards can still be hit with a rifle. I would guess that over half of my secondary arrows into animals were on animals that were already down and going to die anyway. It is exceedingly difficult to get a follow up shot on via a bow on an animal that is wounded but not mortally so.

On the occasions where I have had to finish an animal with a rifle, it is because I cannot get close enough with a bow to finish the animal off (aside from the charges that were stopped, like the one I just didn't have enough time to wait for the arrow to kill it before I became cat food). I jokingly tell my PH that I just bought him a hunt if I am not able to grab the rifle and do the honors myself.