Wounded Animals

Muley_73

Very Active Member
Messages
2,770
LAST EDITED ON Oct-31-18 AT 03:24PM (MST)[p]I figured I'd add to the long range debate and throw out some actually numbers from this past season.

I spent 49 days on the Vernon Unit this past season. Talked to a lot of hunters on all three of the hunts and kept a close eye on the unit more so than other units.

I personally knew of 9 bucks being wounded on the archery and muzzy hunts. I believe they give 37 tags on each of those hunts. The rifle hunt I spent all but the last Sunday on the unit. I knew of a total of 1 buck that was wounded and got away, that was out of 105 tags. (Those numbers do not include landowner or conservation tags)

My personal feeling is that the technology advancements on archery and muzzleloader season combined with the inefficiency of those weapons to kill cleanly is a greater treat and loss of animals than long range rifle hunting.

I'm personally all for clamping down on the technology. Take away trail cams, rangefinders (on all hunts), inline muzzys, scoped muzzys, 80% letoff bows, expandable broadheads, rifle scopes over 9 power, no hunting off of ATVS. Do it all and bring it back to a balance. But if you are not going to control is evenly across the board you all ought to get off the long range blame wagon. It is only a small part of the current issues we face and much smaller than other issues that most choose to ignore.

I'll add an edit in the name of transparency. Currently I shoot a full Gunwerks set up. It has killed 6 deer over the past 3 season 25 yards to 550 yards. I would gladly switch it out for the list above. Until then I will practice and shoot the best I can.
 
I will. What good will taking away all those things prove? And when you say "hunting off ATV's" does that mean driving off road (illegal as can be in most states already), or using it to drive on roads instead of a truck/suv?

You want the long range wounding to stop, quit glamorizing P&Y/B&C scores...
 
roadrunner,
I am not trying to prove anything. I am stating facts that eliminating all of those things will effectively reduce the yardage that all hunters feel comfortable taking shots. You will still have clowns try stupid things but it will be far less common on all hunts. As far as ATVs. Go take a look at Idahos ATV hunting laws. I think they are great and would like to see them adopted across the West.
 
You come up with a real way to make people recognize and respect their own physical and mental limitations and wounded/lost game numbers will drop drastically no matter what weapon or technological doohicky people are using.

It doesn't help that a lot of manufacturers are making their products seem effort, training, and discipline free to use their machines.

The truth is you ain't Carlos Hathcock and I ain't never going to be Davey Crockett. But there's plenty of fun on the mountain for the both of us without having to increase the risks of wounded and lost game if we can both recognize our limitations.

I truly believe one of the best ethical principals hunters can accept these days and would help all the way around is IF YOU MAKE IT BLEED YOUR HUNT IS FINISHED FOR ANY OTHER ANIMAL. What I mean is if you wound and loose an animal your hunt is finished. You can keep searching for that animal but don't shoot something else and slap your tag on it. I think you would have a lot fewer people treating big game like target practice if that was the rule. Regardless of the weapon or range.

Glad you got to spend that much time chasing muleys this year.
 
Why don't we eliminate the rifle season. That would save 100+ deer and leave more to wound for the others that you hate so much.
 
tracker,
I don't hate any hunters I am purely pointing out numbers and reality. I archery hunt and I muzzy hunt and rifle hunt. I am a hunter, bottom line. But to continually pick and choose who we lay blame on it ridiculous. Technology across the board is hurting our herds and most are too selfish to address the real issues.
 
I would agree with all of the above. But your type of hunting isn't the problem. It's the idiot shooting 1200 out of the box or with little to no practice.
 
Alwayshunting,
I believe that the idiot taking a 60 yard plus shot with a bow or a 200 plus yard shot with a muzzy is bigger problem than than the idiot taking on unskilled 1200 yard shot. At minimum they are equal problems. The overall wound % on archery and muzzy is much higher than the overall wound % on rifle. I have not problem shifting more tags from rifle to archery and muzzy but they should all be limited in technology bottom line!

Utah added a special muzzy hunt in 1978 or 79 I believe. It was called a primitive weapon hunt. It is not longer a primitive weapon hunt at all. It should be pulled back to what it was originally intended for.
 
Expandable broadheads are not the problem every animal I've killed with a grim reaper I've watched them die very quickly. Bury any broadhead in a shoulder bone on an elk and it has a good chance to survive. Shot placement is what's key not expandable vs fix blade.

"We don't have a gun problem we have prescription drug problem."
 
People have been wounding animals since the days of sharpened sticks and atlatls. The changes you suggested may lead to a few more tags, but animals will still get wounded.


2a0fcsk.gif
 
LAST EDITED ON Oct-31-18 AT 04:38PM (MST)[p]Most states in the west already say you cannot shoot from a vechicle, across a road, etc. So, the ATV thing is just the absence of enforcing law already on the books.

Trail cameras are not the cause of wounded game. 12x scopes are not the cause of wounded game. Range finders do not cause wounded game, on the contrary, will mitigate it by taking away the guess work. In line muzzleloaders won't cause wounded game either.

To say those items cause game to be wounded is like making everyone hitch up a wagon and team so no one can speed again and cause car accidents.

Educate the hunter and quit glamorizing score...
 
i'm sure higher percentages of animals are lost during the bow hunts than any other. i'm sure more are wasted during the bow hunts as well, especially elk not recovered the same day. all that meat is wasted.
 
roadrunner,
The wounding is just a spin off of lost game and lost opportunity due to overall advances of technology. My point is if youre not going to manage it across the board then lay off the long range blame game. From your couple of posts I get the feeling that you don't understand the overall dynamic I am talking about.

You obviously did not go read what the Idaho laws for ATV hunting are. Not surprising as most usually assume they know and make statements based on assumption rather than knowledge.
 
wstrntines,
I shoot expandables as well. My point is not that they don't kill. My point is they allow tighter groups and produce confidence to take longer shots at animals. Extending the effective range for those that practice and creating false and unethical shots for those that don't.
 
Muley, I savvy what you're saying. The advancement in technology has given some the Superman feeling to do things they ought not be doing. Glamorizing long range shooting on TV doesn't help.

But taking it away won't stop it.

And no, I did not, nor will I read Idaho's ATV laws. If they are great and speak to what you're saying about taking away modern advantage to prevent wounding, it shouldn't be too different from what other state's laws read that I have read.

If I'm not following what you're saying it's because you stated modern technology and it's inefficiency causes more wounded game than shooting at a deer from 857 yds. The tech can make it happen, but Johnny Trophy may not...
 
>tracker,
>I don't hate any hunters I
>am purely pointing out numbers
>and reality. I archery
>hunt and I muzzy hunt
>and rifle hunt. I
>am a hunter, bottom line.
> But to continually pick
>and choose who we lay
>blame on it ridiculous.
>Technology across the board is
>hurting our herds and most
>are too selfish to address
>the real issues.


You're complaining about technology but at the same time you're using a "full Gunwerks set up". You're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Equipment like what you're using wasn't in play when firearms seasons were established so you're as much a part of the problem as those you're complaining about.
 
I have been involved in the Utah rifle deer hunt every year since 1960.
In my veeery unscientific observation the wounded animal ratio has not changed much in the last 58 years.
I think that if anything the percentage of wounded animals is less.
When I was young the deer hunt was a family affair that included Uncle Fred that borrowed a 30-30 that he had no clue weather it was sighted in and broke a few legs.
Today hunters seem to be more serious about it, the casual hunters are becoming less and less.
Hunting technology, like all others, is neither inherently good or evil...it is all about the application.
 
No it's reality that most are too selfish to admit and address with real solutions. Let blame others and keep doing what we are doing. In the mean time our wildlife resources suffer and dwindle.
 
Many,Many,Many Reasons/Problems with todays Management!

If We're Clamping Down!

Let's do it Right!

Fred Bear Types Only!

Hawkins/Open Sights Only!

30-30 Lever Actions with Open Sights!

Out Law Every F'N Wheeler/Side X Side,I'm Talkin Every F'N One of them & Make them Open Season if Seen on Public Ground during Hunting Season!

You Know that 1978 Bushnell Spotter I Own that You all make fun of?

That'd be the Maximum Power you could pack!

Make all Trail Cams legal Bullseyes!

The List goes on & on & on................!

Ban All:

"I needed the Meat Hunters"!

"I Filled My Tag Hunters"!

"Milk on the F'N Lip Hunters"!

That Ought to be enough to PISS Somebody off!











I know so many people in so many places
They make allot of money but they got sad faces

It Ain't Easy being Me!:D:D:D
 
I happen to agree with muley 73. No doubt those less efficient weapons are wounding way more animals than rifles. I have hunted with all three weapons. The last three years have been primary archery. The rifles are much more deadly and efficient, there is no arguing that.
 
Muley,

I can agree with most of what you've said, however all of the technology that you've mentioned isn't the cause of more wounded animals. For instance, it's my experience that the range finder has reduced the amount of lost game. I can't prove that scientifically, it's just my experience.
Yes a rangefinder may give you more confidence and information for shooting longer range, but it's also aided in more accurate shots at, let's say 50 yards or so.
With that being said, I will agree that I've seen more animals lost during archery season than any other.

hwy
 
I think plenty of people would continue wounding animals even with restrictions on technology. The simple fact is there's a lot of idiots out there. Even if we were all hunting with a lever action open sight 30/30 there's still be plenty of people who?d see an animal and totally blow there wad and think they could make a 200 yard off hand shot. People need to realize their limits and respect the animals enough to stay within them and not take risky or marginal shots.
 
I don't disagree with much of that logic. But you can regulate all of those things easier than you can regulate the idiots. In fact in most cases now days our socitety accommodates the idiots.

OR....Bess...
We could keep all the technology and cut the tags down to 40-50k and rotate units giving 2-3 year breaks every few years on each unit. Last year there was around 135,000 applicants. So according to simple math that would mean you should be able to cycle those 135,000 hunters through the system every 3 years. Up the tag prices to 120.00 and boom same money for the state. Easy easy fix to balance the herds and even relieve pressure on each one. But those that care more about a ya every year will scream and give something for the DWR to lean on and make no changes....because that's the easiest route.
 
?My personal feeling is that the technology advancements on archery and muzzleloader season combined with the inefficiency of those weapons to kill cleanly is a greater threat and loss of animals than long range rifle hunting.?

I believe the technology advancements of archery, muzzleloader and long range rifles have made these weapons MORE efficient to kill cleanly.

The problem is too many of the people releasing the arrows and pulling the triggers are relying on that technology to make up for poor hunting skills.

The animals we're pursuing deserve the respect of the most humane kill possible. By that I mean don't release the arrow or pull the trigger until you are 100% confident of a humane kill. Let the animal get closer or get yourself closer. If that means letting the buck or bull walk than so be it. Your ego will survive.
 
Yes.....If in the hands of ethical and profiecent hunters. However that is not something we can control.
 
Muley73 I see your perspective on expandables.

"We don't have a gun problem we have prescription drug problem."
 
?Yes.....If in the hands of ethical and profiecent hunters. However that is not something we can control.?

Indeed!

However, we never have or will be able to legislate ethics and morality.
 
I See & Hear too many of them BRAGGING:

It was only an 1,100 Yard Shot but I Must of Missed because He didn't go down!

Most of them Too F'N Lazy to walk that Far & Check things out!

In about 1978 I Got My first/what I thought was a BAD ASS Rifle!

Capable of making 350-400 Yard Shots!

I Still Hunt with that same Gun today!

Packed it so Long I can't Give it up!

Yes I Have Bigger Guns!

But in today's Standard I'm Known as the Short Range Idiot!

I always thought Hunting Included getting Close enough to an Animal to Out Smart Him & make an Ethical Kill!

What I've Learned & Know Don't Mean JACK F'N SQUAT in today's World!

The Deer Herd of this State isn't coming back in any Type of Quality!

PISS POOR MANAGEMENT Since 1972!

And 30+ other reasons why!












I know so many people in so many places
They make allot of money but they got sad faces

It Ain't Easy being Me!:D:D:D
 
I will not jump into a purely anecdotal debate except to say rangefinders reduce wounded game in all instances.

The ethical hunters use them to be more precise and/or stay within their limitations and even the slingers and flingers at least know the ranges-so logic dictates it even helps with them. They would sling and fling anyway.

There?s no downside to knowing the range.
 
>There?s no downside to knowing the
>range.

I think the downside, and to muley73's point is the guy that bought the $8,000 rig, read all the instructions and thinks because he now knows it's 1200 yards and the paperwork the gun came with tells him the gun will shoot that far he can take that shot. Nevermind he's never shot the gun that far before. He watched them do it on TV and it was easy! We're becoming Shooters not Hunters. A couple weeks ago I killed two Elk, one at 40 yards and one at 60 yards. I could have killed them with a 22lr.


#livelikezac
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-01-18 AT 08:20AM (MST)[p]Cbeard,
I would not be inclined to argue that point had ?acceptable? ranges remind the same as they were pre rangefinder days. Growing up i shot A LOT Of archery. I surrounded myself with very good bowhunters and shooters. 60 yards was pushing the limits. Now most archers have a 80,90, 100 even 120 yard pins. The same with muzzy 100-150 was max, now the average guy is popping at 300 yards or more. Same with rifles. Before rangefinders the likelyhood of a Miss was way way higher so most hunters got closer. No doubt that longer ranges wound more animals across the board. But add in that fact to ?primitive? weapons that are already less effective killing weapons and you're % of wounding is much higher than rifles.

So acknowledge the increased efficiency on old ranges for all weapons add in the increased harvested and wounded animals at ranges that have been doubled. Sounds like we ethically ought to cut tags significantly.
 
The introduction of doping your scope to the hunting world has made self proclaimed sniper-hunters.

A lot goes into purposfully hitting a 4 inch square at 1000 yds and most who pretend they can do it cannot in real life (hunting situation).

I know a "bowhunter" who thinks because he can consistently shoot his bow at 3 foot square targets at 120 yds in his backyard can apply that to shooting at mule deer and elk. In short, this dummy makes pin cushions out of animals until they are hurt enough to where a closer 30 yarder can be made for a clean kill shot.

I would've thought that his Swaro optics, Salomon boots, Kuiu camo, Rage broadheads, Hoyt compound, Gold Tip arrows, and Carter release aid would've made him a better shot and hunter. Guess not.

But I digress with my rambling and thinking out loud.
 
I would like to know how many hunters you talked to during each season to get your numbers? Was each wounded deer caused by a different hunter or did one hunter wound multiple deer?

If you talked to 5 hunters during the archery hunt and they all wounded 1 deer and you talked to 4 during the ML hunt and they all wounded 1 deer and 1 hunter during the rifle hunt and he wounded 1 deer, we are looking at the same rate as opposed to 30 during archery, 30 during ML and 30 during rifle.

"People can come up with statistics to prove anything, 14% of all people know that!"
~Homer Simpson
 
I don't know that technology is the problem. I think it has more to do ethics than anything. I think there are people who are better shots at 650 yards than I am at 350. It's all about knowing your true capabilities and having the discipline to stick to them. It is one thing to know what your capable of, but a completely different thing to stick to it when that big buck or bull is spotted "just" out of range.

I think we as hunters need to police things a little better. It amazes me out how rampant trail camera and campsite theft is, or driving off road/trail is, or lobbing shots at 800 yards is.

Next time that guy tells you he's set up for long range, but has just missed 7 shots, tell him how you feel. Respect for the animals will do more than deciding whether or not is okay to use a 4x or 14x scope.
 
Not sure if this was already said - I don't have time today to read through all the posts on this thread.

It seems to me that no matter the technology level of the hunting equipment used, the responsibility to not wound an animal rests on the hunter. Know your limitations & practice, practice, practice before the hunt to make an ethical shot.

None of us is perfect, but make sure you know your equipment and only take a confident shot that you know you can make.
 
Rut,
I talked to multiple hunters on all three hunts. More on the rifle than the other hunts. I followed multiple social media sources that provided information ie, IG and youtube.

Only one hunter wounded more than one deer. The rest were singles.
 
Agreed that it's ethics. But that seems in much more short supply than technology.

In the end it's not long range that is having the negative impact. It's the overall advancement of technology and fading of ethics. Can?t conintue down that road without cutting back tags if we truly are conservationists first and hunters second. Which in today?s day in age is required if we want to continue our beloved tradition.
 
Cody-

Interesting post. I am in favor of limiting technology for all weapon types because I understand that increased technology leads to more dead deer. I would like to increase opportunity and one way to do that is by limiting technology. As to your wounding analysis, I am sure that deer get wounded with all types of weapons, particularly when you have sportsmen who push their limits and lack common sense.

Now, let's move on to the real issue. What type of buck did you take on the Vernon? Don't hold out on us. I hope it was a good one.

-Hawkeye-

My Favorite Expo Tag Quotes:

"It is fair to ask how much comes in with the five dollar application fees and how much went onto the ground.? Don Peay of SFW during 3/31/2005 Wildlife Board Meeting.

"There will be a full accounting of how the applications fees are spent.? Don Peay of SFW - 9/26/2006 - Monstermuleys.com
 
What about Outfitters that post people all summer to track the biggest and strongest bucks that can keep quality deer around ? Utah has now and will only get more overcrowded, meaning more angry hunters that will do anything to succeed when they do draw. Idaho is going downhill so quickly now also.
 
Take away trail cams and it will cost Outfitters a lot more to sit on specific animals. Here is a thought also, stop setting the system up to kill most bucks as yearlings and 2 year old deer. If you increase the age class of the deer on units it will reduce the number if guides out pounding the handful of mature bucks that we have on each unit.

I met the guy in charge of the whitetail and mule deer program for the state of Texas this fall. He has been working with The Mule Deer Working Group. His studies are showing that one of the biggest problems facing mule deer is the lack of mature deer in the herd. Now I know that goes against the forever claims of the Utah DWR that 5 bucks to 100 does is healthy and that anything over that is just "excess" bucks. But I have come to believe that to be shall we say, "fake news". There are a lot of people that still believe fake news and I am equally as sure that many people in Utah still believe what the DWR has told them over the past 50 years. I am just not one of them and I don't think I ever will be.

So keep the technology and continue to pound the resource or actually make a push for real management of our resource and lets make some real changes.
 
Drop my .02 Rrrrrrrr!!!!! Aaarrrgggg!!!!!!

There is a ton of idiots out there!! But even the greats wound one every now and then. If you re bustin holes in one every year that you re not recovering, though - you might want to check your methods... I wonder if they get that sick and suffering feeling that never goes away when they dont recover an animal... (HELL THEY DONT EVEN CHECK TO SEE IF THEY HIT THE DAMN THINGS CUZ ITS TOO FAR TO WALK AND LOOK FOR BLOOD!)

There is no way to police any of this stuff. All you can do is be the best you can be, dont take unethical shots, lead by example and try to pass good knowledge on to any one who will listen.

I saw a guy wound a tiny fork on opening day of the hunt 5 yrs ago at 500+ yds. I see him every year since then and cringe at all the coyotes he feeds!
 
Also i wonder how many MMers are the ones we re blasting here: so many people here ask "im leavin for hunt at X location i ve never been to... time constraints at work, etc. prevented me from scouting, would you tell me where to hunt?" Do you think they had time to go to the range and shoot a few boxes of ammo from their new 6.5 Creedmoors ??? Do you think they have the inner strength to pass on that iffy shot??? They drove 1000 miles and will only get that tag once every 5 yrs....
 
....most spray and pray long rangers never know if they wound.....If it don't fall dead on the spot...it's over...head to the next target.





497fc2397b939f19.jpg
 
Homer,
As opposed the guys checking at 200, 300, 400 yards? I've actually witnessed the opposite. Most real long rangers are so anal that they check everything, including where and what they hit. Far more often than the ?its one paper at 100 yards crew?.
 
now we have real long rangers and unreal long rangers. thanks for the heads up.
not fake new flash, real long rangers feed the fire for the unreal long rangers. can't separate them.
the real long rangers wound too, they just do it at longer ranges than the its on paper crew.
 
Lost a bull with a muzzy this year. Not a good feeling. A buddy lost a buck with a bow. Different state, but see your point. Ive lost a deer with a rifle too. So it negates the point a little. Either way, im sick about it.
 
I really don't think that technology has much to do with animals being wounded. If you eliminated scopes on rifles the same people that are now wounding animals at 1,000 yards would start wounding them at 250, and the people now wounding them at 80 yards with compound bows would wound them at 50 with recurves. If anything I think the technology helps prevent animals from being wounded. With this being said I think what people see as the biggest problem with technology is an unfair advantage given to the hunters, which increases success rates(especially on trophy animals) and therefore decreases opportunity whether it be fewer tags given out or fewer animals to hunt. The bow hunters will always say that the long range rifle guys are the problem and the long range rifle guys will say the compound bows are the problem. I really don't know what the best solution is but I would say that eliminating range finders would greatly reduce the efficiency on all weapon types, although I am almost certain that it would lead to more animals being wounded, with that being said if I was a big old buck standing on a hill and some guy was trying to kill me, I would just assume he didn't have a range finder. I also agree that if you wound an animal you should not be allowed to pursue any other animal for the rest of the season, this would be difficult to enforce but would at least get some of the irresponsible hunters to think before they shoot.

Mark
 
Without a range finder, I would zero all my rifles at 300 yds and assume everything to be under 400. Aiming for the double lung region will guarantee a kill shot either on the mark, 2" high, or 2", but still a kill shot. The one issue is when it is 430 and you hit the briskett and nothing vital.

I would hate to wound an antelope in Sept and then not be able to go deer hunting in Oct...
 
It comes down to knowing you're own limitations and not letting yourself be buffed up with a false sense of security or skill bc of technology. Yes you can laser point that buck at 983 yards... yes your scope has the dial to perfectly put your bullet in the spot and may even have an assisted aim to show you where to hold... but a jerk... a twitch and your shot is pulled and you is or in this case wound an animal.

I see the point of the original post about removing technology or at least controlling it. And I personally would disagree for the fact I can use that tech to make myself a better and more ethical hunter. I know my limits however. As good of a shot as I might be... I've never shot a target let alone an animal at 500+ yards. Knowing that animal is that far wont make me shoot it. It will give me my spot that I have to close on.
 
I see a couple of different arguments being made here. I've primarily hunted archery the last 30 years but do rifle hunt occasionally. If we are talking wounding ratio's than more primitive weapons I believe wound equal to or more animals than long range shooters. If we are talking about what's best for game populations I've said it a million times that technology is a huge problem that gives the hunter to much of an advantage. Whether it be rifle, muzzy or archery the guy that gives in to temptation will do it with or without restrictions and the guy with the ethics will keep within his limitations. The difference is with limiting to traditional archery, muzzy and no optics on rifles is the deer/elk at the longer ranges live on period. Really have you ever tried to hit anything at 400 yard with iron sights? We need to put the hunt back in hunting and woodsman ship back in the woods!
 
>You come up with a real
>way to make people recognize
>and respect their own physical
>and mental limitations and wounded/lost
>game numbers will drop drastically
>no matter what weapon or
>technological doohicky people are using.
>
>
>It doesn't help that a lot
>of manufacturers are making their
>products seem effort, training, and
>discipline free to use their
>machines.
>
>The truth is you ain't Carlos
>Hathcock and I ain't never
>going to be Davey Crockett.
> But there's plenty of
>fun on the mountain for
>the both of us without
>having to increase the risks
>of wounded and lost game
>if we can both recognize
>our limitations.
>
>I truly believe one of the
>best ethical principals hunters can
>accept these days and would
>help all the way around
>is IF YOU MAKE IT
>BLEED YOUR HUNT IS FINISHED
>FOR ANY OTHER ANIMAL.
>What I mean is if
>you wound and loose an
>animal your hunt is finished.
> You can keep searching
>for that animal but don't
>shoot something else and slap
>your tag on it.
>I think you would have
>a lot fewer people treating
>big game like target practice
>if that was the rule.
> Regardless of the weapon
>or range.
>
>Glad you got to spend that
>much time chasing muleys this
>year.

I agree with this statement 100% you make it bleed you notch your tag!!!! I live and hunt Idaho where a lot of this technology isn't legal and it almost makes for more animals lossed after the shot. I hunt archery, muzzleloader, and rifle and the first two have some restrictions I don't completely agree with like not being able to use lighted knocks or Expendables. Or muzzleloaders being restricted to lead bullets only. Non of these restrictions will give you an advantage over the animal it will only help you make a cleaner kill and help with recovery. Also if the states started making range finder illegal don't you think that would make for more wounded or unclaimed animals? it becomes a guessing game at that point. I'm not into the whole long range stuff either 300 yards is a long shot for a rifle in my opinion.
 
I personally know a guy who drew Dutton Archery Elk this year, stuck and lost two bulls before he hit and recovered his 3rd bull.

I do not know the specifics on his losses and I don't care to listen to the excuses, but he does brag about how well he shoots at targets 80+ yards.

I'll also be transparent.
I hunt and am very effective with my 338 Lapua topped with a Nighforce NXS scope and my muzzy is a Knight topped with a 4x12 Vortex.

I have never taken an animal over 500 yards with anything.

I do not own a single trail cam and have never cared to.

I am all for going back to the basics and adopting "primitive weapons only" hunts.
Also back to the three basic seasons with no special hunts of any kind.
 
Hey Elk Assassin..just read your post clearing up the hunting problem...we follow by your rules...be nobody hunting anymore...The Tree Huggers will really love you!!!!HEHEHEHE
 
>Hey Elk Assassin..just read your post
>clearing up the hunting problem...we
>follow by your rules...be nobody
>hunting anymore...The Tree Huggers will
>really love you!!!!HEHEHEHE


You gotta Re-Phrase that Longun!

If that's all it Takes to Piss everybody off enough to Quit Hunting Sobeit!

The List of Problems is way Bigger than what I Posted!

So?

Me & PUNK are the only two on Earth that don't Run Trail Cams!







I know so many people in so many places
They make allot of money but they got sad faces

It Ain't Easy being Me!:D:D:D
 
>LAST EDITED ON Oct-31-18
>AT 03:24?PM (MST)

>
>I figured I'd add to the
>long range debate and throw
>out some actually numbers from
>this past season.
>
>I spent 49 days on the
>Vernon Unit this past season.
> Talked to a lot
>of hunters on all three
>of the hunts and kept
>a close eye on the
>unit more so than other
>units.
>
>I personally knew of 9 bucks
>being wounded on the archery
>and muzzy hunts. I
>believe they give 37 tags
>on each of those hunts.
> The rifle hunt I
>spent all but the last
>Sunday on the unit.
>I knew of a total
>of 1 buck that was
>wounded and got away, that
>was out of 105 tags.
> (Those numbers do not
>include landowner or conservation tags)
>
>
>My personal feeling is that the
>technology advancements on archery and
>muzzleloader season combined with the
>inefficiency of those weapons to
>kill cleanly is a greater
>treat and loss of animals
>than long range rifle hunting.
>
>
>I'm personally all for clamping down
>on the technology. Take
>away trail cams, rangefinders (on
>all hunts), inline muzzys, scoped
>muzzys, 80% letoff bows, expandable
>broadheads, rifle scopes over 9
>power, no hunting off of
>ATVS. Do it all
>and bring it back to
>a balance. But if
>you are not going to
>control is evenly across the
>board you all ought to
>get off the long range
>blame wagon. It is
>only a small part of
>the current issues we face
>and much smaller than other
>issues that most choose to
>ignore.
>
>I'll add an edit in the
>name of transparency. Currently
>I shoot a full Gunwerks
>set up. It has
>killed 6 deer over the
>past 3 season 25
>yards to 550 yards.
>I would gladly switch it
>out for the list above.
> Until then I will
>practice and shoot the best
>I can.

I see you left compound bows off the list. They should be the first to go
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-16-18 AT 11:23PM (MST)[p]Take
>>away trail cams, rangefinders (on
>>all hunts), inline muzzys, scoped
>>muzzys, 80% letoff bows, expandable
>>broadheads, rifle scopes over 9
>>power, no hunting off of
>>ATVS.
>

>I see you left compound bows
>off the list. They
>should be the first to
>go

With all due respect, I've never known a recurve bow to have 80% letoff ?
 
I don't know that technology has increased wound and loss percentages, but I expect it has increased success rates (percentages of tags filled).

I expect that shooting (any weapon) outside of one's scope of competence, for that weapon under the shooting circumstance, is to blame for the greatest amount of wounding.

Lack of sufficient follow through probably accounts for a lot of killed and lost animals.

It's all speculation.
 
Elk, I'm with you and punk...I don't run trailcams neither...but I do have 4 x 12 Leopulds on my scoped rifles..
 
IMO

rangefinders help and result in less wounding.

I have taken over 100 deer with a bow. Tough to admit but wounding with archery gear for most guys is more likely then a gun.

Expandable heads will IMO by far result in less wounding. Very few guys properly tune a bow - very few. Many never shoot their broadheads. Expandables are a quick fix - and a good one.

I use a scoped inline muzzleloader and I am less likely to wound vs rifle because I limit my range a lot more.

Rifle scopes over 9x, ATV's and trail cam's I would be fine with taking away.

80% letoff bows neutral.

I have seen technology make lazy hunters even more lazy. You should see the xbow revolution I witnessed here in Ohio. Talk about a far superior weapon (vs even a compound bow). Yikes. I own one and have hunted with it and so I have my girls. Took a doe with one. Far far far superior to bows.

I think states should require a wounding policy (like AK did for bears in some areas) draw blood your done. I would obey it but have a really hard time if I barely grazed a bighorn I knew would live. But I would follow it and be more careful.

I would definitely add wounding = done to your list.
 
I just get pissed when I work my backside off to find a buck I call ?big enough? then I have to remember I don't have the infinite advantage over Dirk Diggler posted up from 7 ridges away with his 338 lapua. Fuggin sucks! So, do you aspire to be Mr Diggler or do you just hone your skill set the best you can with adderall and mountain ops?!



Sit tall in the saddle, hold your head up high, keep your eyes fixed to where the trail meets the sky...
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom