The science is final…

[Marble]

I would like to see something that explains why 5-10% of the hunters kill 90% of the animals. I've seen that number repeated quite a bit. My first thought is experience makes the difference, but the study says otherwise. Probably a lot of factors go into why that number is true. If it's true at all.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[MuleDeerMike]

Spending more time during the season actually hunting increases your odds of success? Crazy.

 

[JDDuf]

What'd you know? Ive been hunting all wrong!

 

[CJohnson]

I would like to see something that explains why 5-10% of the hunters kill 90% of the animals. I've seen that number repeated quite a bit. My first thought is experience makes the difference, but the study says otherwise. Probably a lot of factors go into why that number is true. If it's true at all.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

Pareto’s Law likely applies.

 

[Yarak]

Now its clear why my success rate has been so low
My couch hunting method clearly doesn't work !!
I guess that means I'll have to put boots on the ground

 

[doc holiday13]

@fngTony
Remove this guys WKR please.

Taco = the most badarse truck of all time. Makes a million miles on a gallon of gas with 1 oil change and no maintence.
Toyota Tacoma!!!

Yeah but a taco truck has built in food prep station, grill and/or oven, refrigerator. And if you need a few extra bucks for gas money or wanna find a local honey hole, sell some taco's and act like you don't hunt

 

[Yoder]

it will only make you a better hunter if its a taco.

If you really want to be awesome, get a tricked out $130k Sprinter van.

 

[Dos Perros]

The being away from camp thing checks out. All the animals I've killed have been away from camp.

 

[5MilesBack]

That isn't science......it's just statistical analysis......i.e......math. That's why so many suck at hunting......LOL.

 

[jayhawk]

One time I was sitting in camp after sleeping in and a big doe walked right out in front me and I shot it. So yeah that study is all wrong.

 

[cjdewese]

I would like to see something that explains why 5-10% of the hunters kill 90% of the animals. I've seen that number repeated quite a bit. My first thought is experience makes the difference, but the study says otherwise. Probably a lot of factors go into why that number is true. If it's true at all.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

Id say those 5-10% hunt more and work harder than most of the ones who aren't successful.

 

[Marble]

Id say those 5-10% hunt more and work harder than most of the ones who aren't successful.

That's what I was thinking too. There are numerous factors creating continual success. I guess the thing hanging me up on the study is the statement experience did not play a role in success rates. Seems counterintuitive to me.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[Dos Perros]

That's what I was thinking too. There are numerous factors creating continual success. I guess the thing hanging me up on the study is the statement experience did not play a role in success rates. Seems counterintuitive to me.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

I think the experience thing needs further reading...from the study:

Our prediction that success rates would be higher for more experienced hunters was partially supported. Although this covariate did not enter either of our final models predicting hunter success, it occurred in the second-best rifle elk model and ranked third of the 6 model covariates in summed LOOcv weights (Table 4). Successful rifle elk hunters had approximately 5 years more experience than did unsuccessful, but values for this metric ranged widely. Years of experience for rifle deer hunters was essentially equal across hunt outcomes, and successful archery hunters had slightly less experience than unsuccessful. Prior published literature relating hunter success to experience reveals similarly contradictory findings, with success positively (Stankey et al. 1973) or not (Boulanger et al. 2006, Lebel et al. 2012) related to experience. Experience was somewhat correlated with age (r = 0.59), and the increased age of more experienced hunters could negate benefits of experience if older hunters were less able to traverse rugged terrain or hunt long days.

 

[Hnthrdr]

it will only make you a better hunter if its a taco.

You mean a “ tall Subaru”

 

[Ozarkansas]

I think the experience thing needs further reading...from the study:

Our prediction that success rates would be higher for more experienced hunters was partially supported. Although this covariate did not enter either of our final models predicting hunter success, it occurred in the second-best rifle elk model and ranked third of the 6 model covariates in summed LOOcv weights (Table 4). Successful rifle elk hunters had approximately 5 years more experience than did unsuccessful, but values for this metric ranged widely. Years of experience for rifle deer hunters was essentially equal across hunt outcomes, and successful archery hunters had slightly less experience than unsuccessful. Prior published literature relating hunter success to experience reveals similarly contradictory findings, with success positively (Stankey et al. 1973) or not (Boulanger et al. 2006, Lebel et al. 2012) related to experience. Experience was somewhat correlated with age (r = 0.59), and the increased age of more experienced hunters could negate benefits of experience if older hunters were less able to traverse rugged terrain or hunt long days.

I think it’s unlikely that advanced age is keeping experienced hunters from success and muddying the waters on that covariate, but that’s just my opinion.
I think it’s more likely that not all experience is created equal: there are guys with 2 decades of experience on high fence ranches in Texas who couldn’t stalk their way out of a wet paper bag. There’s also guys with 5 years of DIY public land elk experience who are already pretty dialed in on that kind of hunting.
Experience is probably just too nuanced of a variable for this study

 

[Dos Perros]

I think it's because there are a couple things going on.

1) age is looked at inappropriately. You learn so much in the beginning, and less as you age. So you would expect success rates to rise sharply and maybe level off once someone is pretty experienced, and then maybe also fall off as people get too old. I'd like to see experienced evaluated at <1 year, 1 to 3 years, and 3+ years. I'd expect there to be differences there.

2) also as you age you may become more discerning in the kinds of animals you want to shoot. You might be more likely to hold out for a more mature animal. You also may just want to be outside, with no real intent to kill, unless a real whopper walks by or something. I know a few people who like to hunt, but don't kill too much anymore (that's my reference).