I saw a statistic that said that roughly 1 percent of deer taken in Illinois are taken by "traditional" bows. I read this as 1 percent of deer taken in Illinois are taken by bowhunters. Shazam!
I guess we are the dreaded 1 percenters!
Good one! And you got that right! Trad guys need to know how to HUNT. Not just be accurate with a weapon.
:thumbsup:
In spite of our low numbers I think the United Bowhunters of Illinois is the most pro active bowhunting organization and advances ethical bowhunting issues with the IDNR. I'm just sorry more Illinois traditional archers are not members. I think in 2011 only a little over 800 deer were killed with traditional equipment out of over 64,000 deer killed with archery equipment.. Also crossbow numbers are growing. I suspect some compound hunters are switching over to crossbows as our State's law is changing to allow regular bowhunters (less than age 62 and without disability) more access to the bowhunting season. Great Buck John.
Jon, not john.
Here is a scary statistic for you Illinois Traditional guys,
We have roughly 18000 bowhunters in Alberta of which very few are Trad guys, anyway our F&W has now put the Bowhunting for MuleDeer on draw pretty much troughout the province because the "Archery" hunters reached their 15% succes rate.
Here is the cruncher, to get drawn you have to compete in the draw with everyone, including the rifle hunters, looks like about a 5-6 year wait for a tag.
Fight that crossbow season with all you have, just sayin'
Regards.
Bert.
It's best not to look at stuff like that Jon. Just depressing.
It's not depressing to me anymore. When the "mainstream anythingers" get their way and mess up the current season, we being an insignificant impact on the resource will give us reason to retain our season.
Hunted Illinois this year with a group of "wheelie" guys. Only trad guy in the group. Well ... 4 shots taken by 3 in the group, 2 wounded and not recovered, 1 missed, 1 down within sight of the stand.
Was a long ride home for the "wheelie" guys:-)
What is the ratio of trad to other archery methods? Been hunting Illinios now for 8 years and haven't met another trad hunter yet in the area I am hunting.
"dreaded" one percenters ?
QuoteOriginally posted by jonsimoneau:
I guess we are the dreaded 1 percenters!
So who will be first to sew a 1% patch on their plaid wool vest!!! :biglaugh:
Years ago, I bought a used Arkansas wildlife magazine. In it they did a survey of archery hunters to see what the crossbow success rate was compared to compounds. The findings were kind of surprising to me and probably would not hold true now.
Crossbows---6% success
Compounds---12% success
Traditional bows---55% success
1%
(http://i725.photobucket.com/albums/ww260/overspined/Tradgang/DD2CB8AB-9389-4658-ABDD-646EEF66FADB-178-0000001A52B675B5.jpg)
2%
(http://i725.photobucket.com/albums/ww260/overspined/Tradgang/ABA5EF2F-6860-4913-B245-18E857156FE1-1267-000000CACBD8B21C.jpg)
Actually I am 100% in Illinois when I think about it.
0% Indiana and not for lack of opportunity, and way over 100% in MI.
0% in CO because apparently I am destined to miss every elk I shoot at, yet kill deer....hmmmm
Gordon,
The "informal" surveys in Montana have the traditional success rate almost double that of the compound. Who'd of thunk that? :dunno: Fortunately, we have managed to keep the crossgun out of our season.
Walt, do you think it's the bows or are we just more dedicated?
I believe it is, like everything in life, the person, behind the bow or equipment (A compound is not a bow. A mechanical arrow launching device, yes. A bow? No.) that makes either one successful. Because one uses a bow does not inherently make him/her a better hunter. There are a heck of a lot of good, I mean really...really good ethical hunters, that use a compound. Most who use the compound are ethical and I would, and do on occasion, share a camp with them, and I am dang proud to be there. What I have found is those who choose to hunt with a stick and string, as a ratio of the whole group, tend to be more persistent; they just hang in there longer and do whatever it takes to get it done, ethically. Success has less to do with extreme shooting skills or bravado, rather it lies in ones tenacity and self-confidence.
QuoteOriginally posted by Walt Francis:
I believe it is, like everything in life, the person, behind the bow or equipment (A compound is not a bow. A mechanical arrow launching device, yes. A bow? No.) that makes either one successful. Because one uses a bow does not inherently him/her a better hunter. There are a heck of a lot of good, I mean really...really good ethical hunters, that use a compound. Most who use the compound are ethical and I would, and do on occasion, share a camp with them, and I am dang proud to be there. What I have found is those who choose to hunt with a stick and string, as a ratio of the whole group, tend to be more persistent; they just hang in there longer and do whatever it takes to get it done, ethically. Success has less to do with extreme shooting skills or bravado, rather it lies in ones tenacity and self-confidence.
Well said :readit: :thumbsup:
A 1% patch? Hmmm......
-Jeremy :coffee:
You nailed it Walt. Shooting traditional gear does take more dedication to become reasonably proficient. It naturally draws those who are dedicated to the sport.
I don't know if Gordon's numbers from AR would still hold true but it really wouldn't shock me if they did. Obviously it will vary greatly state by state and with different species, but overall I wouldn't doubt that traditional guys have a pretty good edge in the success department simply because of the types of hunters they tend to be.
It would sure make an interesting study for some wildlife resources graduate student.
Illinois keeps track via mandatory call in or check ins where you select the weapon used. I would say they ought to be very close in their #'s.
I agree Walt. I think we enjoy our bows more which in turn makes us more persistent.
Funny Joke Jon.
Walt, well said. I would think most Trad hunters wait for better shots at closer animals increasing their success. It burns me to hear about some guys who wound 4 and 5 deer a year with expandable broadheads and long shoats at deer that are not broadside.
I'm not saying all compound hunters do that, just the ones that do seem to talk the loudest.
I'm pleased to see so many quality bowhunters in the traditional ranks. I think I would give up archery before I would go to a compound, at 64 traditional is all I have ever shot.
I'm pleased to see so many quality bowhunters in the traditional ranks. I think I would give up archery before I would go to a compound, at 64 traditional is all I have ever shot.
I hunt with a compound and a longbow but i know my limits with both, some people just have no respect for what they hunt and try to push the limits of their ability.
Why do you feel it necessary to belittle and insult compound shooters?
I didn't see any posts knocking on compound guys. All I'm saying is a statistic claiming that less than 1 percent of all deer taken in my state are taken by bows. I don't consider the new compounds to be bows. I think if you are going to hunt during bow season then you should use a bow. This thread will get pulled for sure. Didn't mean to make it controversial or a compound vs. recurve/longbow thing. Just sharing what I thought was an interesting statistic.
Having been the president of a 700 member archery club for 16-17 years, and having hunted in archery camps all over the place for more than twice that long with both trad and wheel bow archers, I feel safe in saying two things......
1. The weapon has no bearing on dedication or ethics.
2. The "average" archer, including the "average" traditional archer is certainly no gleaming testimonial to the term "ethics".
I`ll say one more thing......even though I personally have made the switch to full time traditional archery, when the anti`s make a serious run at archery hunters, and they will because we are the smallest block of big game hunters by far, I sure hope that those wheel bow guys are there to help defend our heritage. They outnumber traditional archers by 5 country miles.
Jon, your first post was very misleading to me. I see what you are saying now that you clarified it. I don't agree though...
I think many here would benefit by Mitch H's wisdom...