Bow hunting V Rifle hunting debate;

[shakey jake]

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

the portugese hunter illeso on here i think posted videos of a wounded wild boar that had clearly been shot with a rifle making an amazing recovery
shakey

 

[howa243]

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

I accept all of that is probably true and none of it validates the use of a bow over a rifle. National training requirements maybe. I think we need to accept that whatever the circumstances or weapon used, there will be f@ck ups. However we need to reduce them, not increase them.

 

[mereside]

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?

I accept all of that is probably true and none of it validates the use of a bow over a rifle. National training requirements maybe. I think we need to accept that whatever the circumstances or weapon used there, will be f@ck ups. However we need to reduce them.

yes and this is done with trained teams to follow up after people can not find a beast things are changing here but slowly

 

[mereside]

I cold go as far as saying it should be law to follow up like Europe for animal welfare

 

[howa243]

yes and this is done with trained teams to follow up after people can not find a beast things are changing here but slowly

Am guessing your hope would be that the requirement to follow up is limited.

I cold go as far as saying it should be law to follow up like Europe for animal welfare

You seem to be using a 'follow up' as an excuse for bowhunting and I would use it as a reason not to.

 

[mereside]

no my whole point is one is not more humane than the other you miss this point totally saying the rifle is somehow a magic laser like thing that kills on contact the rifle is no different to the bow it is fact, my experience of follow up shows me how animals survive or die, what experiences on follow up you are using against bowhunting is factual based on your experiences or are you just reading things and basing it on this?

 

[mereside]

Am guessing your hope would be that the requirement to follow up is limited.



You seem to be using a 'follow up' as an excuse for bowhunting and I would use it as a reason not to.

Limited not at all it is the normal

 

[howa243]

no my whole point is one is not more humane than the other

And the nice folk from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department?

you miss this point totally saying the rifle is somehow a magic laser like thing that kills on contact

Never said it.

 

[JTO]

They will also take clients out as well or am I missing something

Eaxactly!

 

[kes]

These figures represent striking energy for a compound bow 70lbs draw weight using 360-500 grain arrows - 75 ft lbs (max) at 25-35 yds and a .308 rifle at 300yds using 150 grain bullets - 1513 ft lbs.
Allowing for hydroshock and to seek to kill efficiently with minimal likelihood of a miss or wounding, (assuming even equivalent accuracy), the bow argument collapses in my view.

Or rather, I couldn't bring myself to shoot deer with a bow, knowing this.

 

[mereside]

These figures represent striking energy for a compound bow 70lbs draw weight using 360-500 grain arrows - 75 ft lbs (max) at 25-35 yds and a .308 rifle at 300yds using 150 grain bullets - 1513 ft lbs.
Allowing for hydroshock and to seek to kill efficiently with minimal likelihood of a miss or wounding, (assuming even equivalent accuracy), the bow argument collapses in my view.

Or rather, I couldn't bring myself to shoot deer with a bow, knowing this.

Kes it has nothing to do with energy of bullet verses arrow, you get a complete pass through even with a trad bow, of the right poundage

 

[mereside]

To show you in real time what happens here’s a picture of an arrow passing through a deer with a broad head the deer is still feeding it happens that fast

 

[howa243]

Videos supporting our view point are easy to find.



And then this

 

[mereside]

If your going to do that I could post thousands of rifle injuries are you saying rifle hunting should be banned along with the bow?

 

[howa243]

If your going to do that I could post thousands of rifle injuries are you saying rifle hunting should be banned along with the bow?

Am sure that you could. As I have said mistakes do indeed happen and it is our job to reduce them to a minimum if possible. If you depute the findings that I have previously posted, can you point me in the direction of independent research that contradicts it please. If not, are you accepting that the wounding rate for bow hunters is greater than for those using rifles?

 

[howa243]

Abstract
The amount of wounding during routine culling is an important factor in the welfare of wild deer. Little information exists on factors determining shooting accuracy and wounding rates under field conditions in the UK. In this study, 102 anonymous stalkers collected data on the outcomes and circumstances of 2281 shots. Using hot-deck imputation and generalised linear mixed modelling, we related the probability that a shot hit its target, and the probability that the shot killed the deer if it was hit, to 28 variables describing the circumstances of the shot. Overall, 96% of deer were hit, of which 93% were killed outright.

 

[howa243]

Danish evaluation

To precis

During the period in question

Hunters fired 576 arrows (371 from blind or high seat) up to a maximum of 30 metres. 11 missed and 32 were wounded.

Is this the European experience that we should be looking at?

 

[John Gryphon]

Now yer just being pedantic

He is ,isn't he ha ha.

He does not say what a bad archer would have done.

So you want me to say that a poor archer would have ffed up? OK consider it done.

 

[landkeeper]

Danish evaluation

To precis

During the period in question

Hunters fired 576 arrows (371 from blind or high seat) up to a maximum of 30 metres. 11 missed and 32 were wounded.

Is this the European experience that we should be looking at?

4.9% wounding rate if you read the whole article and over 87% complete pass through rate of arrow through the roe deer

 

[howa243]

4.9% wounding rate if you read the whole article and over 87% complete pass through rate of arrow through the roe deer

Yep. And if you shot from a high seat at deer 30 meters away, would you expect to lose 5 for every 100 shots?