On hunting with less efficient weapons

[ianpadron]

I would venture to guess that practice time with a given weapon annually is a much stronger predictor of wounding than type of said weapon...

 

[Yoder]

If you are gonna be any good, you need to shoot year round. Plain and simple. Especially if you are just learning - OP has never shot a bow and has limited experience hunting. If you want to learn something, you either practice all the time or you go half-assed.

You seem to think that half-assed is the way to go.

I bow hunted from 1978-2013 and still do on occasion when the state forces me to either bow hunt or sit out the year. Not my preferred way anymore.

There's a big difference between a 20-30 yard shot out of a tree stand and shooting 50 yards after a long stalk. I also think it depends on your base skill. I've shot a bow, ever since I can remember. In my teens, I shot almost every day. I can start shooting a few months before the season no problem. I also don't shoot past 30 yards at an animal. If you are brand new, I think you should really take it seriously and shoot a lot. Even then, with modern bows and sights, it's almost like shooting a gun at this point once your sights are setup and your bow is tuned.

Traditional archery is completely different. There I agree you should shoot all year a couple times a week. That is extremely tough. I used to shoot instinctive with a compound when I was younger. Ted Nugent was the man back then and that's how I wanted to shoot. I even had an Oneida bow. I stopped shooting for about 7 years and when I started back up, I tried to shoot like I did when I was young. I lost a bunch of arrows, and I couldn't hit anything. I bought a sight and a peep within a week.

 

[Beendare]

I would venture to guess that practice time with a given weapon annually is a much stronger predictor of wounding than type of said weapon...

or at least highly correlated.....

 

[North of 60]

Get extremely proficient at whatever you use with good penetrating broadheads for archery or good bullets for your rifle, take closer shots, and it will minimize bad outcomes. Bow hunting you will see lots of big deer outside of an ethical range. My preference bow hunting is shots within 10 yds and around 25 max to reduce string jumping or wounding without recovery.

Humans have been bow hunting for centuries. Compared with trad archery, compounds with peeps are an easier button, and Xbows are the most easy button for archery. As others have mentioned instinctive shooting with recurves or longbows takes much time and effort for most to become proficient, and is much fun when proficiency is reached. I'm more proud of the does I've taken with a recurve than any of nice bucks I've taken with a compound or Xbow.

Deer hunting (medium game) is also a bit different than hunting larger game. When rifle hunting large game (elk and larger here if you get the opportunity), keep shooting (it may take 2, 3, or more shots) till their head stays down and that will help keep from losing a large game animal you thought would stay down that gets up and runs into the next county.

 

[doc holiday13]

...............................................
...........................................r.
My question is: what’s the justification for using a less proficient/accurate weapon to hunt? .....................................
..............................................................................................

On what basis are making the assumption that archery or blackpowder is less proficient or accurate???

Thats kind of akin to making up explanation for something despite not having any knowledge of the topic..

"bang-flop" with a modern rifle happens less that most people realize and death is rarely instant

One could actually argue that archery can be more 'humane' and/or efficient than rifle if it was understood how quickly an animal fades out with a heart shot and full pass thru. AND if you consider how much an animal does not feel when they're hit with a sharp broadhead.

Skill level as a hunter needs to go up as the modernity of the weapon goes down.

If someone isn't proficient with a hunting tool, then they probably shouldn't be using it.

 

[5MilesBack]

I own rifles, ML's, and bows. I rifle hunted for years, but switching to archery was life changing for me. Part of that was just using a bow, but being able to hunt the entire month of September was big as well. A broadhead through both lungs is a very efficient method of killing. How you get to that point though is all up to you.

 

[Trumpkin The Dwarf]

Archery hunting forces you to know your prey species better. Plain and simple. You have to get closer to the animal before you can shoot. Familiarity leads to respect. In an ideal world, that leads to better, more involved conservationists.

Obviously that doesn't happen for everyone, cause people are... well... people. But on the whole I find my tradbow friends have the highest respect for game animals of all the hunters I know.

 

[Btaylor]

Still a relative newbie to hunting here, with two deer to my name—one via rifle, the other via crossbow. I’m very interested in picking up a compound bow and getting proficient with it, but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t have some hesitation about hunting with it when there’s a more powerful weapon permitted during the same season (meaning the crossbow: I use a Ravin R10 with a quality scope and it’s a tack-driver out to 50 yards).

I imagine this is one of those quasi-religious questions in the hunting world, and one that’s probably been written about a million times, so if anyone knows of a good article or thread that covers this, I’d be grateful for the pointer.
My question is: what’s the justification for using a less proficient/accurate weapon to hunt? Why would we want to use a primitive weapon, or a muzzleloader or a compound bow, when such weapons increase the likelihood that the hunter may injure an animal? (Actually, is that even true or am I making a false assumption? I’m just assuming we’re more likely to injure with an arrow than a bullet.) If our goal is to follow fair chase and to harvest, say, a deer as efficiently and ethically and quickly as possible, shouldn’t the law demand that we always use the weapon that will get that job done best? This is an aspect of hunting seasons/guidelines that I still haven’t grasped.

Is the answer the sort of obvious, sentimental one?---that some hunters just prefer bows to rifles and so natural resource departments allow for archery seasons to accommodate that, even though (again I’m making an assumption) rifles kill more efficiently? If that’s the case, isn’t that idea in conflict with the priority of killing cleanly? Don’t muzzleloaders, for example, increase the chance that someone will make a bad shot? (I do realize that new muzzleloaders are pretty dang accurate.)

I should add, I really am asking with genuine curiosity, not an agenda of any kind. I’m not skeptical about having these seasons---I’m just not sure I understand the rationales behind them, and am very open to being persuaded. If the answer is that we want to give the deer a better chance by making hunting a bit harder---and so this is a way to prolong the hunting season and avoid over-harvesting---are we accomplishing that goal without injuring lots of animals in the process?

Replying before I read the replies so this may already be covered but imo you are conflating hunting and killing. The hunt is is being able to get within the hunters effective range with the weapon they choose. A centerfire rifle in one set of hands may be effective at 1000 yards. In another set of hands it may be effective at 100 or less. The killing is being able to accurately place your shot once the animal is within your effective range. But that also requires being able to accurately read the animal's body language for clues as to how they might react at the shot (a bow hunting thing mostly). Lots of people look at a traditional bow for example as a massive limitation to killing success. I do not see it that way at all. The effectiveness of the weapon is only limited by the skill of the hunter to be inside their effective range and to make an accurate shot.

One of the big decisions a hunter needs to make is whether or not the kill is more important than the hunt. Whatever the answer is, choose an appropriate weapon for your skill level but continue to work at building your skill level with that weapon. It may also be just as important to you, esp. as you gain experience and kills, to continue to build your skills on the hunt side of the equation. If you are wondering who is better, the gun hunter or the bowhunter, the answer is the trapper. Enjoy the process and dont worry about all the statistics about wounding and what not. You are in control of your hunt so control what you can control which means being accurate and efficient with your chosen weapon. Then put as much effort into the learning to hunt as fits your goals.

One last little tidbit, again just my opinion but the best way to get good at killing is by killing. Maybe think about adding some small game pursuits too to sharpen both hunting and shooting skill. Skwerls with a 22 are a jam up good place to start there.

 

[BigDewberry]

A lot of interesting opinions here. Most of them boil down to archery makes it more exciting for me the hunter. I'm a bit skeptical of the claims that archery is just as lethal as rifle. That doesn't hold up to the sniff test of my real life experience and how historical people migrated to more efficient methods once they could.

 

[Macintosh]

I'm a bit skeptical of the claims that archery is just as lethal as rifle. That doesn't hold up to the sniff test of my real life experience and how historical people migrated to more efficient methods once they could.

Of course as a subsistence hunter I want to increase my effective range. But the implement iteself GIVEN A GOOD HIT has no issue. The variable is the human sending it downrange. Clearly its easier to be "as accurate" with a scoped rifle compared to a bow, and much easier to get within range of an animal while remaining "as accurate". The PROBLEM is that people for the most part refuse to find and stay within their limits, not that bows are less lethal. Is that a people problem, or an implement problem? Serious question.

 

[displacedtexan]

A lot of interesting opinions here. Most of them boil down to archery makes it more exciting for me the hunter. I'm a bit skeptical of the claims that archery is just as lethal as rifle. That doesn't hold up to the sniff test of my real life experience and how historical people migrated to more efficient methods once they could.

An arrow through the lungs is as deadly as a bullet.

An average rifle shot can consistently put a bullet through the vitals at what, 100 yards? For an average bow hunter around 30?

A rifle is no more deadly. It just has much greater range.

 

[timberland]

Enjoy the process, its not just about the harvest. I don't muzzy hunt because I hate cleaning guns. I love shooting a hand bow, and appreciate the intimacy of an archery hunt.

When I need to fill the freezer, the rifle comes out, and I literally have been hunting out of the same box of shells for the last 8-10 yrs. I just don't enjoy shooting a gun or crossbow anymore. There is a standard progression of an outdoorsman (including fishing) and you are in the beginning stages. Don't worry about external influences, if something excites you like hand bows, pursue it.

ENJOY THE PROCESS.

 

[Beendare]

Replying before I read the replies so this may already be covered but imo you are conflating hunting and killing. The hunt is is being able to get within the hunters effective range with the weapon they choose. A centerfire rifle in one set of hands may be effective at 1000 yards. In another set of hands it may be effective at 100 or less. The killing is being able to accurately place your shot once the animal is within your effective range. But that also requires being able to accurately read the animal's body language for clues as to how they might react at the shot (a bow hunting thing mostly). Lots of people look at a traditional bow for example as a massive limitation to killing success. I do not see it that way at all. The effectiveness of the weapon is only limited by the skill of the hunter to be inside their effective range and to make an accurate shot.

One of the big decisions a hunter needs to make is whether or not the kill is more important than the hunt. Whatever the answer is, choose an appropriate weapon for your skill level but continue to work at building your skill level with that weapon. It may also be just as important to you, esp. as you gain experience and kills, to continue to build your skills on the hunt side of the equation. If you are wondering who is better, the gun hunter or the bowhunter, the answer is the trapper. Enjoy the process and dont worry about all the statistics about wounding and what not. You are in control of your hunt so control what you can control which means being accurate and efficient with your chosen weapon. Then put as much effort into the learning to hunt as fits your goals.

One last little tidbit, again just my opinion but the best way to get good at killing is by killing. Maybe think about adding some small game pursuits too to sharpen both hunting and shooting skill. Skwerls with a 22 are a jam up good place to start there.

^ Great post!

 

[BigDewberry]

To each their own. I pick up a rifle the moment I can and set my bow aside for the season. The myriad of things that can and will go wrong on a hunt point me towards the weapon, a rifle, that will alleviate some of those issues. A rifle is simply a more effective, deadly, lethal, and ethical weapon to use in the actual conditions of hunting.

 

[KHNC]

Kind of a non-sequitur to say it is irresponsible to tell someone they don't have to shoot year round and then admit a couple of posts later that you do that very thing - only shoot for a about a month before the season, isn't it?

My reply was not directed to the OP - it was in response to the other joker that said "You have to shoot year round in order to be proficient." That is an incorrect and inaccurate blanket statement that certainly does NOT apply to all archers or bowhunters. And you are proof of it - - - in your own words!

If you want to be precision accurate with a compound bow, then you have to shoot year round. Or at least most all of it. If you want to be a pie plate shooter at 20, and call it proficient, then maybe not. I like kill what i shoot at , and refuse to be limited to 20 yards or less. So i practice , a lot. And it helps that I like to shoot my bow(s).

 

[displacedtexan]

To each their own. I pick up a rifle the moment I can and set my bow aside for the season. The myriad of things that can and will go wrong on a hunt point me towards the weapon, a rifle, that will alleviate some of those issues. A rifle is simply a more effective, deadly, lethal, and ethical weapon to use in the actual conditions of hunting.

How does a bullet in the vitals make an animal more dead than an arrow?

 

[BigDewberry]

How does a bullet in the vitals make an animal more dead than an arrow?

I agree, a well placed arrow in the vitals will kill an animal.

My argument is that a rifle is a better tool to do that job. My 308 kills a deer on impact or seconds after the majority of the time. I have not seen similar results with a bow, even in optimal conditions.

My point as stated above is that most of the opinions on here about why people use bows are around season regulations and the hunters own desire to feel excitement, which answers the posters original question.

 

[Hnthrdr]

Archery hunting forces you to know your prey species better. Plain and simple. You have to get closer to the animal before you can shoot. Familiarity leads to respect. In an ideal world, that leads to better, more involved conservationists.

Obviously that doesn't happen for everyone, cause people are... well... people. But on the whole I find my tradbow friends have the highest respect for game animals of all the hunters I know.

I feel like this was really true, but the respect aspect has been watered down a ton by the instabros/ YouTube crowd/ archery is looked at more and more as just an easier way to get tags/ cool kids do it unfortunately. I hear lots of tails of guys slinging arrows way way too far just so they can get that grip and grin!