Welcome to TheOhioOutdoors
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Login or sign up today!
Login / Join

Deer recovery using fixed vs mechanical blade

MK111

"Happy Hunting Grounds in the Sky"
Supporting Member
6,551
66
SW Ohio
Interesting article in QDMA or a Military Base research of deer recovery using fixed blade vs mechanical blade and bow vs crossbow.
As stated later in the report the results are probably somewhat out of line with the normal hunting public. The reason being that this is a highly prized hunting area that hunters probably won't take a chance at marginal shots knowing the research is going on.
From past test results I've read in Deer & Deer Hunting I find this to be somewhat true as their research puts recovery at near 50% for both bow and gun hunters.
Still I find the article interesting.http://www.qdma.com/articles/high-d...tes for Fixed-Blade and Mechanical Broadheads
 

reo

Junior Member
484
68
N.E. Ohio
Interesting article in QDMA or a Military Base research of deer recovery using fixed blade vs mechanical blade and bow vs crossbow.
As stated later in the report the results are probably somewhat out of line with the normal hunting public. The reason being that this is a highly prized hunting area that hunters probably won't take a chance at marginal shots knowing the research is going on.
From past test results I've read in Deer & Deer Hunting I find this to be somewhat true as their research puts recovery at near 50% for both bow and gun hunters.Still I find the article interesting.http://www.qdma.com/articles/high-d...tes for Fixed-Blade and Mechanical Broadheads

Wow, I gotta say I am pretty surprised at the 50%. I am not questioning your post in any way. I am just happy that myself and those that I hunt with beat those stats all to hell as it is VERY rare for us not to recover a hit deer. Don't get me wrong, it happens but not anywhere near 50% of the time.
 

MK111

"Happy Hunting Grounds in the Sky"
Supporting Member
6,551
66
SW Ohio
Wow, I gotta say I am pretty surprised at the 50%. I am not questioning your post in any way. I am just happy that myself and those that I hunt with beat those stats all to hell as it is VERY rare for us not to recover a hit deer. Don't get me wrong, it happens but not anywhere near 50% of the time.

I understand. I would say the forum members on TOO and any good forum site are a cut above the average deer hunter. How many times have you heard the story of a hunter buying a ML rifle at Kmart on Friday and going hunting the next day. It happens way too many times.
Also a lot of hunters think if you put a 12 ga. slug through a deer it should drop in it's tracks. I hunted with a guy that did this same thing. He shot at a doe and thought he missed. I seen the deer run past me with blood on it's side. He never showed up so I went to him and asked why he didn't check. The reply was "I missed as it didn't drop". We found the doe about 100 yds. away.
The below average hunter sorry to say have no blood tracking skill.
Like I said in my mind us experienced hunters are a cut above the norm.

Not to brag but I've only lost one shot deer in 48 yrs. out of 45-50 taken. The neighbor wouldn't give permission to track on his property. I found out later he tracked it down and eat the deer so it turned out OK.
 
Last edited:

Schu72

Well-Known Member
3,864
113
Streetsboro
Keep in mind, this study was done in an enclosure. Sure its 3000 acres, but the deer can't run onto a property where you don't have permission to retrieve etc. Not a fair chase situation. Also there was an earn a buck stipulation which would put added pressure to recover any wounded antlerless deer.
 

brock ratcliff

Dignitary Member
Supporting Member
24,834
247
That was an interesting read, Frank, thanks for posting it! I do not believe the recovery rate is that high in the general population of hunters. I base that solely on the fact I hear so many "one that got away" stories through the course of a season. Perhaps this coming year I should actually keep track of what I hear; maybe it's not as bad as it seems.

I have no doubt that mechanicals have a better result across the board. They are more accurate for most, and from what I've seen, cause a better on-the-ground blood trail. They have their down-side of course, but for the masses, I think they are an improvement towards more recoverable game.
 
I do NOT like articles that pit equipment types against each other for comparisons, as to success. Nor do I like comparisons of methods of hunting success. It separates us as hunters and what is THOUGHT we should hunt with and/or how we should hunt.

What type of equipment is most successful is determined by the hunter using it.
What method of hunting is most successful is determined by the hunter using it and the location it's being used.

The variables for success are off of the chart.
Bowhunter57
 
I tend to agree with MK111. I will add this, since I started using Grim Reapers I have not lost any deer. Haven't had a tracking job more than 50 yards. Is that because I have become a better shot, better hunter over the years. I think that's a major factor in the equation.
 

AndyP

Junior Member
1
0
I presented the Broadhead Study to the Southeast Deer Study Group at their meeting in Athens, GA. I surf hunting web sites looking for discussions about the Study (courtesy of google) and occasionally step into the conversation to clarify, add background info, and further the discourse. The SEDSG presentation was based on a research paper I wrote last year, "A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness of Fixed Blade and Mechanical Broadheads". This paper's research methodology, data analysis, results and conclusions were independently reviewed by University wildlife scientists under the purview of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. I presented the paper at the SEAFWA Conference in Oklahoma City last October. SEAFWA will publish the paper in their online Journal in April 2014(+/-). Once the paper is published, it will attain the status of scientific opinion. This is not the final word in the FB vs mech debate! Like all lines of scientific inquiry, the results remain to be either confirmed or refuted in future studies.

I included research data in my SEDSG presentation that is not in the paper as a matter of interest - I had the liberty to do so. QDMA wrote their article based on my presentation. I invite reasoned questions on the Broadhead Study in the comment section of the QMDA article.

- Andy Pedersen

In the meantime, I'd like to address some of the above posts while I am here.


From past test results I've read in Deer & Deer Hunting I find this to be somewhat true as their research puts recovery at near 50% for both bow and gun hunters.

I've got a pretty good understanding of deer wounding/recovery rates research. The 20+ studies that report an average of 50% wounding rates are all over 25 years old. The four most recent studies (with modern archery equipment) report wounding rates of 13%,14%, 17% and18%. (I authored one of those studies that was published in 2008). So my advice is to not quote the 50% from these old studies (as HSUS and PETA are so fond of doing) - they are obsolete! Think of how the technology in bows, arrows, sights, broadheads, and 3-D practice targets have advanced since 1989.

Keep in mind, this study was done in an enclosure. Sure its 3000 acres, but the deer can't run onto a property where you don't have permission to retrieve etc. Not a fair chase situation. Also there was an earn a buck stipulation which would put added pressure to recover any wounded antlerless deer.

Actually P&Y reps came out to the Base and determined that the harvest of trophy bucks was under fair chase rules. The 3000A are on two separated parcels that are along the Potomac River and tidal creeks. There are ~15 miles of unfenced shoreline, and deer have no qualms about swimming. We also share unfenced boundaries with a State Park and a Wildlife Management Area.
The bowhunters on Base are monitored. Of course monitored bowhunters are going to be on their best behavior, and that alone separates the bowhunters on Base out from the general population.The preseason qualification test and education requirement are also unique qualifiers. And we do exert reasonable effort to recover every deer!

I do NOT like articles that pit equipment types against each other for comparisons, as to success. Nor do I like comparisons of methods of hunting success. It separates us as hunters and what is THOUGHT we should hunt with and/or how we should hunt.

What type of equipment is most successful is determined by the hunter using it.
What method of hunting is most successful is determined by the hunter using it and the location it's being used.

The variables for success are off of the chart.
Bowhunter57

This was a comparative study that allowed me to examine the effectiveness of fixed blade and mechanical broadheads. The events had already occurred, could we learn anything useful from the data? There are many other uncontrolled variables that determine whether a bowhunter will recover a deer or not. (e.g. lapsed time before taking up the track, hunter experience, alertness of the deer, arrow momentum, etc., etc.). For those who think that there are just too many variables to make any research meaningful, please read in Dr Ed Ashby's prologue his opinion of "outcome driven" studies: http://www.tradgang.com/ashby/Momentum Kinetic Energy and Arrow Penetration.htm
Pay attention to:
"When dealing with infinitely complex variables, only ‘outcome driven’ information analysis, from a multiplicity of data, provides usable results."
 
Last edited:

huntn2

Senior Member
6,090
157
Hudson, OH
Appreciate you joining and chiming in on the article.

I'd be interested in you sharing more of the statistical analysis and conclusions you have gathered from other studies you have led or been a part of as well.
 

Treed

Junior Member
522
0
Stark County
I was thinking a 50% wounding rate was somewhere in the realm of PETA propaganda high. I've personally never lost one though I know a couple people who have. If I was only recovering half of the deer I was shooting, I'd stop wounding animals and find a different pastime. I appreciate your input as well and welcome further discourse on the subject.
 

hickslawns

Dignitary Member
Supporting Member
39,720
248
Ohio
I was thinking a 50% wounding rate was somewhere in the realm of PETA propaganda high. I've personally never lost one though I know a couple people who have. If I was only recovering half of the deer I was shooting, I'd stop wounding animals and find a different pastime. I appreciate your input as well and welcome further discourse on the subject.

I would agree. I won't say it doesn't happen. I know myself and others who have lost a deer. Seems i generally either get a kill or a total miss. I find this a blessing. Would much rather have a clean miss any day of the week. Just saying it happens sooner or later whether gun or bow if you hunt enough.

Thanks for chiming in on this thread. Feel free to stick around.
 

Treed

Junior Member
522
0
Stark County
Thanks. Don't mind if I do. I've been fortunate in that respect. My hunting partner lost one this season and it ate at him until he found out a young man shot the buck during youth gun season on the property next to his. I wasn't trying to come off like a dick but man....50% is pretty outrageous. My conscience couldn't handle it.