its is giving the rest of us a headache also. I imagine there are probably at the most 7,000 hunters that only check the archery deer tag box. the rest are rifle hunters that couldn't draw a tag. The dedicated archers in the state should still get a tag. If they cut the days down like they want I bet some go unsold because the rifle guys will just wait for a rifle tag. currently they give 14,500 tags to the archers so that means we kill 2,600 (18% success) deer and since they all say that we wound one for every killed :roll: that makes it 5,200 deer. obviously the herd is in trouble because of us. the rifle and muzzy hunters 24,000 (30% success)they only kill and never wound is much better for the herd.

 

It really is giving everyone a headache.

I spoke with my uncle yesterday about this and was shocked when he said that the archers need to be limited because they are wounding too many deer. He quoted posts on MM as his ammunition.

Did I mention my head hurts?

 

And if we don't all stand up to this at the end of the day on Dec. 2nd our other end is going to hurt more :shock:

 

It really is giving everyone a headache.

I spoke with my uncle yesterday about this and was shocked when he said that the archers need to be limited because they are wounding too many deer. He quoted posts on MM as his ammunition.

Did I mention my head hurts?

This was brought up in the meeting we had the other day, but really there isn't any good numbers out there that prove this. Also there were talks of ways to help this change this mindset. Every biologist I have heard, including Anis on the radio the other day, said there is NO biological reason to not allow statewide archery. It comes down to what people think is fair, not what is best for wildlife.

 

".... It comes down to what people think is fair, not what is best for wildlife."


This dirves me crazy!!

 

".... It comes down to what people think is fair, not what is best for wildlife."

This dirves me crazy!!

Me too!

 

It comes down to what people think is fair, not what is best for wildlife.

Couldn't agree more. Just be ready to combat the idea that archers are wounding a lot of deer.

First like you menioned there are no numbers to prove that this is really problematic. Second I have heard that studies show that 20% - 60% of deer that are hit with arrows will survive the encounter. And that number includes deer that were taken by a well placed shot so if we could segregate just the population of deer that are never found, one could make the argument quite easily that most deer survive misplaced shots. 20 - 60% is a broad range and that is second hand knowledge. But the idea makes sense and means just because a deer is wounded by a poorly placed shot we certainly shouldn't assume they all die.

I've taken at least 2 deer that had old broadheads in them. I mean OLD broadheads encased in some hard substance their bodies create to protect themselves and had no noticeable signs of crippling from the injury.

 

It comes down to what people think is fair, not what is best for wildlife.

Couldn't agree more. Just be ready to combat the idea that archers are wounding a lot of deer.

First like you menioned there are no numbers to prove that this is really problematic. Second I have heard that studies show that 20% - 60% of deer that are hit with arrows will survive the encounter. And that number includes deer that were taken by a well placed shot so if we could segregate just the population of deer that are never found, one could make the argument quite easily that most deer survive misplaced shots. 20 - 60% is a broad range and that is second hand knowledge. But the idea makes sense and means just because a deer is wounded by a poorly placed shot we certainly shouldn't assume they all die.

I've taken at least 2 deer that had old broadheads in them. I mean OLD broadheads encased in some hard substance their bodies create to protect themselves and had no noticeable signs of crippling from the injury.

Wow, that is interesting. What part of the body did you locate these broadheads?

 

Both were in the high shoulder area below the spine.

 

And if we don't all stand up to this at the end of the day on Dec. 2nd our other end is going to hurt more :shock:

Agreed!! Thanks for the input guys. Yeah, I get a little tired of hearing how bow hunters wound all the animals, and I am not really a bow hunter. If we don't all bang together (all: every weapon) on this thing, we will be our own downfall. Hit the WB and RACs hard fellas!

 

to flippin many

 

to flippin many

Please explain. :? :roll:

 

I didn't wound anything with my Bow...everything I shot at is dead!

 

2008 wounding rate on Utah general archery deer hunt was 4%. Limited Entry archery deer hunt was significantly higher, (but still much lower than the anti-bowhunters would like you to believe), at less than 20%.

http://www.bowhuntersofutah.net/index.p ... -side.html

Nobody knows how many bowhunters there are. But the number of hunters who hunt with a bow fluctuates - the better the incentives, the more hunters choose bow.

 

well come on guys lets go hunt some wheres else. i am hunting Wyoming one year and Idaho the following. it is a sad day when i would rather give my hard earned money to another state, instead of my own. I am also tired of hearing the "its not fair" speech. in Idaho and Wyoming the archery starts in sep not aug, much better time IMHO to start. and the deer i see there top what i see here and i don't have to hike my butt as hard of to get a glimpse at one boomer buck maybe two. but i will buy a archery tag just so i can shoot a doe at the end of the season for some great deer meat. since drawing a doe deer tag is a freaken joke also. but that another story for another day