nub

TJ: Since you have some time, you should insert specific changes in the WI. regs and technology into your table. It would be neat to see the year tree stands were allowed. Also lines in your table where the compound acually came in and perhaps some other significant changes.

Have you figured in the fact that something like 20% of the archers probably take 80% of the deer?[] Face it, some bowhunters will take numerous deer per year. Some historically take none.

TJD

Not sure where to get that data from, Nub. Arthur actually had a pretty good history along with dates in his post above.

One of the things I do see is that the success of bowhunters went up significantly, way before you started to see bows with greater than 65% letoff in any numbers until the mid-1990' s. In fact, there has been almost no impact if we look at the numbers. If the first one appeared in 1991 as Arthur stated, then in looking at the numbers...: 1991 succes was about 31%, in 2001 success was 32.2%. An increase, but also one that could be exlpained by any number of factors.

Meanwhile, the success rate jumps from 7% in 1966 to about 31% in 1991, and P&Y remains relatively silent on almost all of the technological advances discussed above. Now suddenly a line in the sand is drawn over letoff, even though we don' t see any significant increase in harvest since the introduction of high-letoff bows. To me, the whole issue of the P&Y rule is a case of closing the barn door after the horse is gone. Again, they can make whatever rules they want; I just wish there was some consistency.

Nub, your point about the 80/20 rule is very true. That may also affect success since that 20% probably turn into very good bowhunters as time goes on. Though I don' t know too many who take more than one deer per year with a bow. Most folks I know tend to wait til gun season to get " greedy" .

rockytop

I think the speed of the bow has contributed to a much higher success rate, also. I use to have alot of deers dodge my arrows, not any more. With the old bows, shooting beyond 25 yards was not very promising shot. Now, I kill deer at 35 yards and they don' t blink an eye before the arrow hits them.

Arthur P

The letoff rule was 50% until 1988, when it was raised to 65%. When you say, " Now suddenly a line in the sand is drawn over letoff..." you are incorrect. There isn' t any suddenly about it. That rule has been in effect for 15 years.

And it has been pretty much ignored for the past 10 years by those who only value the kill as the sole indicator of a successful hunt, and want every possible scrap of challenge removed from the hunt so they can kill something. Make it easy enough and anyone can kill a deer.

Easy - rubber boots and scentlock instead of being extra careful about the trails you walk and the wind direction. 300 fps instead of 200 fps. Carbon arrows and mechanical broadheads instead of aluminum arrows and fixed, resharpenable heads. Fiber optic sights (or telescopic or holographic or lazer sights) instead of brass pins - or no sights at all. Designer camo, dropaway rests, harmonic dampers, hydraulic stabilizers, mechanical releases.... Anyone that thinks none of that stuff has greatly affected the hunters success rate is pretty much saying he can have the same amount of success with a recurve as he can with all the doodads.

I' ll issue the challenge for that man to lay aside his high tech stuff and hunt with a recurve and aluminum arrows this season. Prove it.

ijimmy

Another factor that has not been mentioned is (more deer and less hunters) . Its a fact that they sell less hunting licences each year and with all the hunters planting food plots , and feaders , nowadays we have more deer concentrated in specific areas . Other than that I think tree stands probably efected sucess rates more than a bows letoff , some pepole shoot better with lower letoff bows .

TJD

Okay, I stand corrected. Again, we see a pretty large increase in success...basically we go from 1 in 12 harvesting a deer to 1 in 5...from 1966 to 1988, or 15 years ago. Now we are approximately at 1 in 3. The largest magnitude of increase occured in the earlier years.

I agree completely, Arthur. I shoot a compound...with 65% letoff may I add...because I know I would not be nearly as successful with a recurve. No argument there. I still believe that a good part of the reason for increased success has as much to do with higher herd densities as it does with technology. Also, I completely agree that technology has made a significant impact in the ways you stated so well.

That being said, Arthur, do we see a limitation on bow speed by P&Y? Or how about the above-mentioned carbon arrows, mechanical broadheads, fiber optic sights...where are P&Y on those innovations that have a greater impact on harvest success than letoff? Again, where is the consistency? If the concern is keeping bowhunting " sporting" and " challenging" , why the silence on a host of technological improvements that have, as you stated, " greatly affected the hunters success rate" ?

So where is the restriction on mechanical broadheads? What about the fiber optic sights? If this is truly an issue about maintaining the " sporting nature" of bowhunting, why don' t we hear a peep out of P&Y about restricting these innovations? Are they trying to say that they don' t have much of an impact on success...which you yourself state..., or is it that too many trophy book bucks were taken using such gadgets by existing P&Y members who now want to try to maintain their own feeling of exclusivity by limiting let-off?

Again, a little consistency? Of all of the advances over the past 40 years that may have contributed to increased hunter success, I would say allowing let-off over 65% would rank pretty far down the list.

MA Jay

After reading all of the theories on what is the most significant factor in increased hunter success in Wisconsin I was surprised to not see what I think is the main 1. MUCH longer hunting seasons. I tried finding info on how long the deer seasons were in the 60' s and while not finding specific dates it appeared they were only a few weeks long for ALL hunters. As time went on and archery season became its own season I think you would find your first significant jump. I also think archery seasons being earlier in the year when deer are easier to pattern would have been a huge advantage, as well as hunting the rut the " prime time" for bagging a buck.

I' m not from Wisconsin and finding deer season data by hunting methods for 20+ years ago isn' t easy on the web, but I do know that from the 70' s to 2003 in the Northeast hunting seasons are months longer than they used to be. I think the combination of higher deer populations plus much longer hunting seasons plus technological advances is the reason for higher success rates ..... in that order I would think.

Arthur P

TJD, by 1988 we already had bows that had full fastflight rigging (Hoyt' s AIM system), very shootable and high performance cams, mechanical releases were beginning to spread through the ranks... A lot of what we have now was already in place back then.

What we did not have. We did not have fiber optics. Other than the Graham Dynabow there were no single cams. We were shooting MAN size bows instead of these little kiddie bows that are being shoved at us. We did not have carbon arrows. We did not have " IBO speeds" because IBO hadn' t come up with their 5 grains per pound rule. If I remember correctly, I think that came along in 89. Or maybe they came out with the rule in 88 and people didn' t start talking about IBO speed until the following year... I' ve slept since then.

But there' s the rub! Isn' t it amazing that one private organization' s RESTRICTION is so widely accepted that it becomes an unofficial industry standard, while another private org' s restriction is berated up one side and down the other? I guess when someone builds a 70 pound, high performance bow that will safely shoot arrows at 3 grains per pound, then IBO will be ripped apart like P&Y has been...
But the very fact that you don' t see P&Y putting restrictions on performance should be a notice to all that they are not a ' bunch of traditionalists trying to limit compounds,' as has been said way too many times by the ignorant.

longbowman

This is a very interseting question but the responses are even more interesting. I' ve been bowhunting since 1966 when there were no compounds being used at all. They were first approved for hunting in 1970. As you look at you data you notice the first significant jump in success in 1974 and that' s about the time the bow companies launched their initial push towards the compounds, everybody had to have one. As you watch the steady incline in success it is nearly all attributed to technology advances. Yes there are more deer and there are more bowhunters but more hunters doesn' t mean higher success rates. If you buy 10 bowhunting videos today 99.9% of those in the video will be using compounds and sights, why? It isn' t because they all love them so much it' s because they are more efficient shot after shot. More efficient translates into..it' s much easier for anybody to put a sight pin on the lung area of a deer and trip a trigger than it is to get to the same point using heavy recurves and longbows. This doesn' t mean it' s a better or worse way to hunt it just means that it' s easier and the video people want to get the kill on the video and move on, so do most hunters.

I owned an archery shop that had indoor lanes and I sold compounds. So I took an entire season and hunted with the latest compound for the time with sights. I hunted New York, West Virginia and Pennsylvania. I had 3 deer that I wanted come within 25 yds. and I shot 3 arrows killing 3 deer. Of those 3, 2 of them would have had to move into a different location for me to have killed them with my longbow but since I was using a compound with sights I had no problem putting the pin on and killing them. Now, I hunt for the main purpose of killing the animal I' m after but I like taking the entire year keeping my accuracy honed to do it with equipment that is much harder to master. That doesn' t make my way better or worse either.

Yes, technology has made the difference in success rates and the average hunter couldn' t stand to let a buck walk just because of equipment limitations.

mez

" I' ll issue the challenge for that man to lay aside his high tech stuff and hunt with a recurve and aluminum arrows this season. Prove it. "


I' m going to take that challenge Arthur, I bought a recurve this winter and plan on hunting deer with it. One question though, Do I have to use aluminum arrows or can I use the pretty wood ones I got from Rouge River?