Bow hunting V Rifle hunting debate;
- Thread starter Uncas
- Start date
jimmy milnes
Well-Known Member
Like ya thinking matey
You might think that, but what about the chattering masses, and Chriss Packham? Go tell them!
mereside
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure that will go down well among SD members who are already priced out.
howa243
Well-Known Member
Thank Christ that this will never happen. There is a guide who I know that specialises in foreign stalking clients. He says that there general level of accuracy with a rifle is really quite poor. Be great for the rest of us trying to keep hold of the last vestige of our rights to own firearms, to have photos of deer with arrows hanging out of them on the breakfast table.
mereside
Well-Known Member
It shows how little you know, there are large organisations making bow hunting legal and I believe one day it will be legal here go look up the country’s now doing it after extensive research and strict monitoring of controlled bow hunting schemes which proved and also paved the way to becoming legal
howa243
Well-Known Member
"Our data shows at least 80 percent of deer wounded by arrows but not recovered survive and live a normal life," said David Samuel, president of the National Bowhunter Education Foundation.
The justification for bow hunting is that if you hit it but dont recover it, then the likelihood is that it will be fine.
The justification for bow hunting is that if you hit it but dont recover it, then the likelihood is that it will be fine.
Last edited:
howa243
Well-Known Member
Not a hope. Which organisations?
mereside
Well-Known Member
Again it shows how little you know with regard to hunting with a bow or how it has been legalised elshwhere with people dedicated to making laws change
howa243
Well-Known Member
It is true. I dont know of any UK based organisations of any size, that are attempting to overturn our current legislation on the issue.
howa243
Well-Known Member
Can you explain the reasons why you use a bow in preference to a rifle please?
howa243
Well-Known Member
Can you explain why it has been legalised elsewhere? Is it because they are capable of doing something that a rifle cannot, or is it simply demand driven?
mereside
Well-Known Member
I would think the BBA will be working away, but I wasn't refarring to uk based groups there is an organisation larger than any here working towards what I said with real studies and shemes to show bowhunting can work and i have already said that urban deer is becoming a huge problem and areas there can not use rifles where bows would be an asset, why are there so many roe in urban areas? wild boar is another issue the bow overcomes again fact is the bow is silent does not cuase issues for wary species and done correctly can have devastating effects again things have been proven in other country's already we are not inventing the wheel, regards wayne.
mereside
Well-Known Member
Hang on a minute thats the same attitude with rifle hunting except that most bow hunters are trained on follow up and understand rates of recovery and injuries, here the rifle hunter has little idea of follow up and goes in only to watch the deer get up and run off I can also say that follow up from a bowhunting prospective a deer is more likely to lay up faster than when hit with a rifle due to not knowing what happened. in the us though many states do not allow follow up with a trained dog or team, some are now changing the laws but again correct proceedures of following up a wounded animal applies and the rate of recovery goes massively up if things are done in the right way, we have shown this here in the uk"Our data shows at least 80 percent of deer wounded by arrows but not recovered survive and live a normal life," said David Samuel, president of the National Bowhunter Education Foundation.
The justification for bow hunting is that if you hit it but dont recover it, then the likelihood is that it will be fine.
howa243
Well-Known Member
[QUOTE="mereside, post: 1479509, member: 2316" we are not inventing the wheel, regards wayne.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. I do not think that we are.
At a recent controlled bowhunt on Mason Neck National Wildlife Refuge, archers took eight deer and reported nine others shot and unretrieved, of which two later were found dead, the meat spoiled. Refuge officials said they expect at least two more of the "stuck" deer died, but weren't found. Texas officials have compiled information on bowhunting for 15 years that suggests about half the deer shot with arrows are successfully retrieved, compared with more than 90 percent retrieved by gun hunters
Agreed. I do not think that we are.
At a recent controlled bowhunt on Mason Neck National Wildlife Refuge, archers took eight deer and reported nine others shot and unretrieved, of which two later were found dead, the meat spoiled. Refuge officials said they expect at least two more of the "stuck" deer died, but weren't found. Texas officials have compiled information on bowhunting for 15 years that suggests about half the deer shot with arrows are successfully retrieved, compared with more than 90 percent retrieved by gun hunters
howa243
Well-Known Member
If I hit a deer with a bullet I would think it unlikely that it would recover and live a normal life. So I guess that is a positive advantage of bow hunting. You can wound it and it may be fine. Be interested to know what the training says about rates of recovery?
Last edited:
mereside
Well-Known Member
again I can say that there are many ijuries that recover with a rifle and others that go off and die terribly, again you are using the US recovery rates where areas can not follow up correctly start looking at european country's where it is a legal requirement to follow up, I have seen deer lose a complete shoulder in summer to a rifle shot and later the deer had healed minis the full front leg was this ok, I have seen other incredible injuries that the deer or boar survived but it must have been horrendus (spelling) many do not get a follow up after being shot with a rifle and wander off to die again this is fact, with bow hunting a razor sharp cut can heal over but take a like for like wrong placement, high shoulder with either a rifle or arrow, firstly the rifle knocks the deer off its feet stunned it takes a while to get up but once it does it runs from a shot site any piece of meat the size of your finger nail usually means the hole is coparable to the size of your fist it misses the vitals there is no blood vessels or arteies but the wound is massively contaminated with bullet fragments hair and debris, in summer its chances of dieing is higher from infection but it can take a long while, take the same shot with the bow the arrow passes through the deer before it realises what has happened it runs feeling something but its a clean cut no arteries or othe contaminants the chances of recovery is hugely higher, I can go on with other injuries like for like, regards wayne
Last edited:
shakey jake
Well-Known Member
the above info does sound pretty convincing but is it all there by this i mean are both parties being honest and giving all the facts, are all deer "missed" by rifles actually misses? also was the report compilled with out any bias? i cant really see the argument against holding water with wounding, how many birds on a driven day are wounded? even with all the pickers up the bird was still wounded not killed, i dont really see a difference
shakey
shakey
Similar threads
