Bowsite.com

Keep the thread up. A good discussion can be had.

What?????

Wounding is a fact of hunting, bow, firearm, whatever. None of us like it, but it’s there. I agree with you that the antis already hate us, so we might as well be honest. I’ve had two unrecovered does, two javies, and one pronghorn, but he was chasing does the next day so I think he lived.

No sir. Your ignorant if you assume you know what they did.

Take it to the grave!

I doubt it had much to do with equipment or shooting ability. Some people just lose it in high-pressure situations. Happens on hunts that you're not used to and on giant trophies. Also, shit happens. Animals jump strings and arrows deflect off of branches and grass.

Also, if you don't have the patience to get down on your hands and knees and blood track for hours, you will lose some animals that you would have otherwise recovered.

Still, 6 seems like a lot, but is not too surprising coming from an outfitter because outfitters are often times taking people from the East who don't hunt elk every year and/or haven't hunted them a bunch and killed a bunch.

This group here is also not generally representative of the average hunter. We can't get enough of it, so we're on the internet talking about it. The average hunter hunts a few days a year and generally sucks at hunting and shooting.

That's gotta be frustrating as an outfitter though, but it is part of it. You're not doing the shooting yourself.

That’s some outlandish stuff to say on open forum and not elaborate?

Smart to ask yourself “if the average mom at a grocery store saw or heard this, what would she think?” before posting anything hunting related.

The one time I opened the NT forum the first thread I clicked on had an up-close photo of a coyote headshot that was incredibly graphic. Photos like that and discussions/comments like this are an anti’s dream as far as propaganda material goes.

Prior to the advent of modern imaging, a surgeon had to make a clinical judgement as to whether someone had appendicitis or not and decide to take them to surgery or not. All appendix specimens are taken to pathology after being removed and looked at by the pathologist to determine if the patient actually had appendicitis or not. If surgeons were 100%, they were considered dangerous because they weren't taking taking out enough and were counseled to go to surgery more often because they would be missing cases of actual appendicitis and this was proven by studies.

The moral of the story is that if you're not letting any animals walk, you're probably wounding more than you should because you're too fling-happy. Maybe you're fine with that, but that's what I believe. At least consider the fact that you will lose opportunities at higher-odds shots by taking a lower-odds shot sooner.

If you're wounding and losing a lot of animals, you owe it to yourself and the animal to either be more patient, get better, learn how to calm your nerves, or switch to a rifle.

And after 15 years on Bowsite damn near on the daily, I've yet to see someone lift a pic or a conversation from Bowsite and use it to make some anti-hunter's point. And that also goes for anything else from our genre. I've yet to see any of the orgs, the journals, etc from the hunting world, other than some trapping pictures that may or may not have been staged.

They (leftists and antis) don't need content because they don't care. They live in an echo chamber of ideology and we have been vilified to the point that a hunter could cure cancer and donate a billion dollars to charity and we'd still be the enemy in their eyes. They really don't care about these sorts of conversations.

You may have heard whispers of this or that, tag burnings causing your draw odds to soar, secret eyes looking around every corner... It's all nonsense. It's just paranoia. They don't care. They have their ideology and beliefs and no matter our grace nor our hedonism nor the most crass and ugly thing about any of us, none of it matters. We're labeled and we fit in a box that they've constructed and that's that.

The only thing we do that matters is afield and in the eyes of normal people.

(Wow, it's deja vu all over again. The following is from a 'letter to the editor' that I wrote over 20 years ago. I think it's still holds up...)

"The antis I’ve met made up their minds long ago, so painting everything rosy isn’t going to make a bit of difference with them.

I’ve long believed that we who hunt and fish are 10% of the population, the anti’s are another 10%, and the other 80% are on the fence. How would you prefer that these people see us – as self-righteous types who never make mistakes, never have doubts, never run into ethical ‘gray’ areas? Would you rather we were seen as fools who don’t even consider the ethics of what we’re doing? Who don’t question our behavior, don’t hash things out, who don’t care what others think?

That’s what the anti-hunters want – for the public to see us as unthinking, uncaring brutes who kill and maim animals with nary a second thought. Hiding the truth behind closed doors doesn’t help our cause at all.

I’m damned sure not perfect. I’ve made my share of bad calls, gotten greedy, shot when I shouldn’t have. As a man, I need, and have, ideals. That does not make me an ideal man. Ideals are what we strive for, work towards, but not what we always achieve. In the heat of the moment we screw up. The important thing is to recognize that we did screw up and move on, resolved to do better in the future.

Are there ethical debates in the outdoor sports? Sure, lot’s of ‘em. Baiting. Hunting with hounds. ‘Canned’ hunts. Snagging. Wounding loss. The proliferation of high technology. The desirability of mandatory shooting skills tests. Illegal introduction of non-native species. Leasing/posting of land. And on and on.

My point is, these things need to be talked about. Openly. Yeah, maybe the antis will latch onto something, take it out of context, and use it against us. They’re good at that. But I believe the danger would be minor at best. I much prefer that the non-hunting, non-fishing public sees us for what we are –fallible humans engaged in a deeply meaningful way of life, thoughtful about what we’re doing and concerned about doing it well. People who are concerned with the ethical implications of our conduct, who are willing to discuss our failures and our doubts and try to find a better way."

Dana L. Charbonneau

this is a reality of hunting in general....not just archery......face the fear and don't be intimidated by opposing views from discussing important topics. Good on you Forrest.....sorry you and your clients had to experience this.

if anyone thinks ant are going to run out of information to use against us and something that doesn’t already exist is going to turn the tide and swamp hunting forever. I think they’re a bit delusional.

Sorry about your predicament Forrest, you have no control over your guests shooting skills . I'd look into a tracking dog for your camps and lodge as suggested. Hope the rest of your season goes better for your hunters and you.

you are right about people judging to quickly without actually being there.

I’ve wounded and not retrieved several animals in my hunting exploits. Hardest thing was ending the hunt with the wounding. I know with all the big bulls around it was tough to hang the bow up after you wounded that big one. You did the right thing.

I make no judgments of the hunters shooting abilities or shot selection for those that have hit and not recovered. I wasn't there so I can't say what went wrong. I do however, make judgements of those that hit, don't find and then keep on hunting. I dont understand this line of thinking.

Flat top adventures had 6 hits with no recovery in 3 weeks. Sounds like this is not an isolated year for them. How many of those 6 kept on hunting? What percentage of total hunters was this in those 3 weeks? FTA has a significant problem that needs to get addressed and soon.

Then you dont Archery hunt much.

From my experience with outfitters/guiding and having a number of friends that outfit it is my personal opinion that the wound rate for outfitters is higher than it is for the average hardcore guy. I don't know what it is, but it seems to me is says something about the clientele and not outfitting in general. Outfitters don't take the shot.

Seems to me it was about a decade ago that wound policies really starting taking off with outfitters and man they got the gears for it. Now, I read about what I would call a rarity where an outfitter doesn't have a strict wound policy and he gets the gears for it. Dang outfitters can't win!

As to the actual original question I got my bull this year, and did not wound any elk. In my lifetime I did wound one bull. I've been drawn for 6 elk tags. I've killed 6 elk total. So I guess I am 6 for 7. What went wrong on that one I will never ever know. I thought I drained him. Small broadhead made tracking really tough. I've changed my stance on heads and always want a large entry hole from now on. My biggest bull I killed and never found a drop. Just thankful he went 50 yards and dropped and I heard him crash. Average viewing distance here is 4 yards so if an animal goes 200 (which they can do with a perfect shot) it's not acceptable to me that I can't find an animal I hit perfect. I want blood on the ground.

This is definitely true. Lots of times animals , especially elk, simply find a way to survive what a shooter may think is a lethal hit. Other times, the hunter not putting in the full effort to find is the issue.

I found this interesting given that your website says the following;

* Combo hunt fee is only charged if tag is filled. Due to our ethics policy your tag is filled when blood is drawn.

Orion you are coming across as a major dick. It does not take much critical thinking to understand that Forest is bummed over his clients losing elk. He is not bragging IMO he looking for a solution.

It is most likely that eventually, I will hit an animal and not recover it. Only difference for me than far too many others is my hunt under that tag will be over.

There’s a group called Rocky Mountain Big Game Recovery that will help. See link

Most of what I read here is keyboard fluff and jealousy. If you want to punch your tag on a shoulder shot animal have at it, I will not.

“ To me, it sounds like a lot of hoops to jump thru when timing can be critical on an early season hot weather recovery.”

Not a lot of hops to jump through when all a person has to do is make a call.

Accountability for the outfitter could easily happen by following his own Ethics Policy. Or does that only apply in regard to the payment for a Combo hunt? From his own statements, sounds like he should have RMBGR in camp with him.

Makes sense to me. To become a “hardcore guy” takes years of blood, sweat & (often) tears. To become the client of an outfitter, you just have to commit the funds.

I’m sure there’s some overlap, but the Venn diagram on that is not gonna look like a bullseye….

I’ve hunted Elk enough to think that if I do get a shot, that’s going to be my shot for that year, so I understand the pressure… and one time I passed up a chip-shot on a big cow just because I wasn’t 100% feelin’ it at the moment…

Knowing me, I’d have a tough time giving up on a wounded Elk unless I was pretty damn certain that no vitals and no guts had been hurt. Of course my arrows are so slow that I would have a pretty good idea, unless the animal blew up at the shot.

It’s really not that difficult…. Just click on a teardrop and you’ll get the info

And no, I’ve never used them. I just know the local guy prior to him having recovery dogs

The better dogs do not follow blood. But the smell of that individual animal. From a gland in the foot.

The dog can detect if the animal is stressed and wounded by the gland excretion.

So try not to walk all around spreading that smell. The dog will eventually sort it out once they get past your smell, but it will just take longer

Its hunting. Anyone who says it isn’t hasn’t hunted much. Or, better said, hasn’t shot very many animals. They don’t want to become supper. They will never stand and take it like the script says. Sometimes it’s ugly. And, I’m certain a lot of times it results in animals that live versus dying a horrible death. As most seem to imply.

In my personal opinion, I think a good bit of wounding is due to having to rush. Or, the inclination we must hurry up and shoot. Bowhunting requires that if killing an animal is your goal, that you take the first opportunity you can that will result in meat in the freezer. We all know that. And, I think subconsciously that’s the driving factor behind a lot of shots that don’t go as planned.

Throw in all the other factors in with our own battle to get this right and it starts becoming something every hunter is likely to face. With any weapon.

I think all predators deal with this when trying to kill dinner. It’s just part of it.

I’m not one to go easy on people who do stupid things, but for a guy who worked hard to be prepared, waited for a good opportunity, and has a conscience about it, that would be a lot to carry around….

Yes, and it was because I hurried the shot. Spent all night and all the next day searching for that doe, and never did find her. Honestly, it tore me up leaving a wounded animal in the field. Haven't made that mistake, nor have I lost an animal since then.

I can't speak to the elk thing because I've never hunted elk. But I have lost a couple of whitetails in my 38 yrs of bowhunting. Yes, I eat the tag if I draw blood... whether I found the animal or not. Season over.

To each their own. Too many ego's. And yes I have lost deer and kept on hunting. And yes it sucks. but it happens. I read that fred bear would sling arrows at animals.

Maybe the license/regs/quota allow more than one per license?

Just a thought

Personally, I believe the " draw blood rule " should have some discretion. Some of these hunters wait a lifetime for this opportunity, limited draws make it even more difficult. All wounds are not a direct fault of the hunter or his/her preparation, and all wounds are not fatal. I have witnessed broadheads deflecting off from ribs, especially if the animal is slightly quartering away or shot from an elevation. I have witnessed poor penetration on elk due to broadhead failure. I witnessed a lost bear due to the expandable not opening. Poor choice, but there is more than enough literature to lead the hunter to believe expandables are fool proof. You know, just ask the guy at Scheels.

All I am suggesting is to use some common sense.

I don't know why they'd be different GG, maybe you do? I absolutely keep hunting, until I've reached my limit. Yes, I count that duck as one in the hand even though I didn't end up with it. I figure limits are imposed for management, not my freezer.

To answer the original question is I have lost 1 out of dozen or so. Hard quartering away that I miss judged and I believe I shot it in the armpit.

^^^^ This! If my elk tag was good for 3 a day and 9 in possession, then I might feel differently about hunting after drawing blood.

For fish, it would be rare that I would ever keep a fish, pretty much all I fish for are trout and I not a huge fan of trout for dinner. But if I were fishing for something I wanted to eat then most likely I would not count a fish lost against my limit. Like for many game birds, with many fish species you are allowed to kill many over the course of a season under one license.

You draw your arbitrary ethical line wherever you want to. I will do likewise. Its only obvious that each of us will think that our way is better than the other way. Thats why we do it that way. I obviously feel the way I do things is better than the way you do, and you likewise. Not once have I said other hunters must be required to operate the way I do. I think it would be better if they did but so be it. I do think there are some circumstances where folks are way off base and need to get their sh!t together. 6 wounded and unrecovered elk in one camp in one year is ridiculous and change is needed for that camp.

Quotas certainly do account for a certain amount of wounded and lost animals. Would love to get some solid data on what those real-life numbers are. Judging by a few of the responses on this thread and others I am thinking my original assumption that it is relatively low is way off. It's clear that I am in the minority on the way I operate.

If the tag was for one dead critter than a wounded and not recovered critter would be counted as tag punched. In states that issue multiple tags then I would go get another tag if possible.

Regardless of how a person responds to a wounded but not recovered animal, I would pray to God that we each have an arbitrary line we would stop at eventually. Clear you wouldn't stop at one. How about two? Three? Four? A dozen? Where is your arbitrary line?

I don't count lost fish as part of my limit. I guess I assume that a fish breaking off isn't going to die. Where-as I assume any animal I've poked holes into will die. I've had 2 gut shot deer, and one that I honestly wasn't sure of (I thought it was a good shot and was surprised when I didn't find it). I found one of the gut shot deer 3 days later. He was laying in a stale pool of water in a mostly dried up creek. He had serious infection and stank horribly, and made no real efforts to bolt as I put another arrow into him. Filled out my tag and left him for the yotes. The other gut shot deer I had was shot 2 weeks later by rifle hunters. They cleaned him and other than a large pocket of puss was starting to heal. He did look skinny and puny though. I had already signed my tag before he had been shot by the rifle hunter. Watching him walk away from my shot hunched over and hurting was enough for me to know I had filled my tag for that season. Looked hard for a week, but didn't see him again until he'd been harvested.

To say stopping applies to others because you would stop, means nothing to me. I don’t hunt for anyone except me. It’s my personal passion.

I’m there first and foremost to kill something. I love the outdoors but, make no mistake, I’m there to kill what I’m hunting. I do respect and love the animals. BecauseWithout them, I’m not a hunter. I’m just an outdoor fanatic that hikes around with a bow.

I keep reading about what we owe the animals. I owe them the best effort I got to make it painless and quick. Aside from that, I’m not romantic about it. It’s KILLING your food.

I hope I never get to the point that my “respect” for the animals I hunt, drives me to look at it differently. I enjoy being a predator on edge for the opportunity to kill my food. It literally wakes me up and reaffirms I’m still alive.

I’ll handle the issue of wounding like I always have. Once I’ve exhausted my search, I’m probably going to regroup and be back at it the next morning afterwards. That’s just the way I’ve handled it. And, I can’t imagine that doesn’t apply to most people.

Do you. Everyone else will do the same. Let’s have fun. Life is short.

Good points GG, but I'm still going to sign tags if I feel I killed the animal (not the animal's fault I didn't fulfill my duty to find it), and I'm still not going to worry about the occasional fish that I didn't land.

That’s true, and tag numbers are generally regulated in number, based on projections of total hunting mortality, whether the animals are recovered or not.

So it’s an Ethical decision. Ethical Standards are always higher than Legal Standards.

And of course, “Legal” is simply the lowest level of conduct that Society will tolerate before responding with fines or jail time, so when someone says that “if it’s Legal, it’s Ethical”, I guess at least you know what kind of person you’re dealing with…

35-40 years ago, there were articles written and published in the top-tier Hook & Bullet magazines — including Bugle, if I recall — in which a hunter would notch his tag when he drew blood. And there was one when a young bowhunter thought he had missed a bull and hunted ‘til he got one; next year, he came across the carcass of a bull which had an arrow just like his entwined with the remains, so - realizing that he’d killed 2 bulls in the prior year, he notched his tag and took home whatever portion of the rack was left. So those were presented as “highest ideals” behavior.

I guess I’d like to think that if I were an Outfitter, I would have a “Be Stupid, Go Home” policy, but I do understand working for tips, and the internet sure has made it easy for an unhappy customer to leave negative feedback, which is not so good for business.

If you're referring to Colorado bulls, the answer is not many.

The hunter is accountable for what happens when he lets the arrow go. That’s the deal.

That is but one example. My ethics are mine, nobody else's. Some of you try to make this cut and dried, it is not that simple. I would avoid any outfitter who has policies, without discression. Common sense should always prevail, IMO.

We have one commissioner right now who would take any opportunity she can to limit archery season and archers. Go ahead FOREST and others, wrap it up with a bow tie and hand her that reason.

Under a previous commissioner, he thought decoys for archers should be illegal as it gave an unfair advantage. WTF?

I've had this exact conversation with past game commissioners who regulate hunting. With a bow, you get basically one chance to make a mistake, with a rifle, you get 4. If you have ever seen an opening day rifle season massacre, it ain't pretty. Seen a few near Estes Park back in the day, an army in orange waiting for a herd to cross a fence, WWIII starts, way more dead elk then license holders, and a game warden watching a disaster unfold.

Hunters are their own worst enemy - VOLUNTARILY, again, and again. Will we ever wise up? STUPID THREAD.

PAT - please delete this ill advised thread before our archery season is eliminated.

For our own sake, our game commission is stacked against us.

I used to guide....and quit it because I was ending up with a bunch of Nimrod guys- you can't always pick your clients.

Just brainstorming here looking at possible solutions...not telling you how to run your business. Have a intro seminar...or create a pamphlet you send to them before the hunt;

1) Tracking dog might make sense...but then you have to drag it up there.... 2) have an intro seminar with each hunter shooting their equipment with you there [though heaven forbid, you tell them anything- grin] teaching them to; A) stick with their shot sequence and focus on a tiny spot when taking a shot and practicing it there at the ranch. Have a mental checklist to all back on when under pressure and practice it every time when shooting. Most of the bad shots I've seen were due to guys getting flustered and losing it. We fall back on our training in fight/flight situations- train accordingly

B) teach them "After the shot" No yelling, "I GOT HIM!!" mark the spot, Stalk the BT silently and with binos seeing everything before a wounded elk sees you, etc

Cover all of the mistakes a rookie makes....they just might listen to you....

I have some experience with this and would be happy to help if you like

Moose probably similar.

in all serious tho, Forest would you mind sharing some additional information? like how many animals were recovered? not that it matters much for the six not recovered, but if you outfitted for 50 hunters and lost six that somehow feels different than going zero for six in total. im not insinuating its the case at all, but it would be interesting to know if a couple guys were given second and third chances or if it was six different hunters.

i think for some folks the idea of losing six in a three weeks pops out, bc we initially relate it to our own experiences. the majority of us will not get six shots at an elk in a lifetime, so it initially jumps out. i can almost guarantee ill hear about six or more not recovered animals in my circle before this season is over.

for those six hunters, those could be the first, last, and only animal they lose, so there are lots of things to consider.

Shane

Yeah, those of us who grew up on One Tag, One Weapon, Take Your Pick probably see things differently than those whose deer managers are looking to maximize the mortality…

And now that NR tags are 100% lottery, you can’t blame CO Elk Hunters for being protective of the resource.

But unless the guides are pushing the clients to take shots that are beyond the client’s comfort/capability, I don’t see how anyone can assign blame for clients who don’t know their own limitations.

I suppose an outfitter would do well to evaluate each client’s archery skills and do their best to get the clients into high-percentage opportunities (I guess that shows you what I know about being on a guided trip!), But there’s only one person holding the bow