Post by woodywilliams on Sept 16, 2005 16:01:59 GMT -5
Bow Hunting: An Important Deer Management Tool
by Michael J. Tonkovich, wildlife research biologist, and Patrick Ruble, Bowhunting Preservation Alliance
In 1982, the Division of Wildlife estimated that there were 82,000 vertical bow (long, recurve, and compound), 11,000 crossbow, 48,000 muzzleloader, and nearly 200,000 shotgun deer hunters. Less than 10 percent of each group was successful that year, shotgun hunters being the exception at nearly 20 percent. Clearly, at that time management of Ohio’s deer herd depended heavily on shotgun hunters. Over the next two decades, a number of things would change including the role of bowhunting as a deer management tool.
The first major change occurred during the 1982-83 season when the crossbow season was expanded to four months to coincide with the existing archery season. Crossbow hunter numbers and harvests increased dramatically as a result of the expanded season. During that 20-year period, the deer population continued to grow and there was a corresponding increase in harvest by all types of deer hunters. Hunter success rates continued to climb.
By the 2001-02 season, crossbow hunter numbers had increased nearly 10 fold to an estimated 106,000. That year the crossbow season provided an estimated 1.8 million hunter-days of opportunity. Nearly 15 percent of crossbow hunters were successful that year. Vertical bowhunter numbers had increased to 88,000, with 15 percent successfully harvesting a deer that year. Hunter numbers and success rates increased for firearms hunters as well, but not to the extent of archers. The 2004-05 archery harvest was 60,626 -- 28 percent of the total harvest.
Another phenomenon occurred during the past 25 years, which has made bowhunting a very valuable management tool. Deer have taken up residence in our cities and towns in fairly large numbers. Bowhunting is often the most effective and efficient way to address overabundant deer in these areas. Cuyahoga County is a good example. The 2004-05 archery harvest was 443 -- 90 percent of the total county harvest. Although an insignificant contribution to the statewide harvest, the harvest represents over 400 animals that likely would have had to have been taken by less desirable means such as sharp shooting or automobiles. The crossbow accounted for the majority of the harvest.
Urban deer problems and problems associated with abundant deer are not unique to Ohio. What is unique is the central role that the crossbow has played in these situations.
Presently, Ohio is one of only seven states where crossbows are legal during the entire archery season. Many state fish and wildlife agencies are exploring nontraditional means for controlling white-tailed deer populations in areas with little or no hunting access. Communities and park systems across Ohio and the U.S. are increasingly employing sharpshooters to reduce local deer populations. Ongoing research in the Cleveland Metroparks is evaluating the feasibility of reducing a local deer population using only chemical fertility control.
In spite of its widespread success in Ohio, especially in our urban areas, few states are willing to consider adding the crossbow to their management toolbox because of resistance from a vocal minority of hunters.
They argue that it does not belong in the archery season and placing it there would reduce opportunity and/or bag limits for all hunters and, in extreme cases, decimate herds. Despite the controversy, many states see the crossbow as a partial solution to shrinking opportunity, an ever-increasing urban deer problem, and as an aid to bolster hunter recruitment and retention.
Crossbows were legalized for deer hunting in Ohio in 1976. Ohio’s estimated 1,400 crossbow hunters accounted for 27 of the 23,000 deer harvested that year.
The crossbow harvest exceeded the vertical bow harvest for the first time in 1989 and it has remained that way since. Approximately 30 percent of Ohio’s deer hunters use a crossbow each year. Annually, the crossbow accounts for roughly 15 percent of the total harvest. Much of this harvest comes from one of five urban deer units. These units were established in 1994 in areas traditionally prone to underharvest and overpopulation. The urban deer permit is good for an antlerless deer only. After a slow start, urban deer permit sales have ranged from 18,000 to 25,000 annually. In a typical year, the urban permit will account for around 5 percent of the total harvest, with approximately 35 percent of these deer taken with a crossbow.
Contrary to claims by anti-crossbow groups of herd decimation and severe restrictions on hunting opportunity and harvest, Ohio has never modified regulations governing crossbows or adjusted harvest regulations because of the crossbow. Modern firearms have, and will always account for the majority of the harvest and have the greatest impact on Ohio’s deer population. The crossbow has never had a significant statewide impact on the management of the deer herd. Ohio’s experience has shown that the crossbow is not an unsafe, hyper-effective hunting implement rivaled only by the shotgun. Hunter success rates are no higher than those for vertical bow hunters.
Additionally, the crossbow may help retain and recruit new hunters, especially youth and women.
The primary reason for reduced activity or desertion among active bowhunters is time constraints. Hence, any effort to make bowhunting more accessible, more convenient, or easier would help address the immediate issue of time constraints and the more important issue of hunting in general. Few would argue that the crossbow is much easier to master and remain proficient with that the vertical bow, or that many of the physical limitations imposed by the vertical bow cannot be overcome with the crossbow. Thus, it seems fair to say that the crossbow would help make bowhunting more accessible, easier, and more convenient.
Ohio’s deer resource will continue to provide our citizens with countless recreational opportunities, for both hunters and nonhunters alike, well into the near future. It will be the Division of Wildlife’s job to try to balance those opportunities with the human-deer conflict situations that will accompany them. Without question, bowhunting and most notably crossbow hunting, will continue to be a most valuable tool for the biologists who work to maintain this balance.
by Michael J. Tonkovich, wildlife research biologist, and Patrick Ruble, Bowhunting Preservation Alliance
In 1982, the Division of Wildlife estimated that there were 82,000 vertical bow (long, recurve, and compound), 11,000 crossbow, 48,000 muzzleloader, and nearly 200,000 shotgun deer hunters. Less than 10 percent of each group was successful that year, shotgun hunters being the exception at nearly 20 percent. Clearly, at that time management of Ohio’s deer herd depended heavily on shotgun hunters. Over the next two decades, a number of things would change including the role of bowhunting as a deer management tool.
The first major change occurred during the 1982-83 season when the crossbow season was expanded to four months to coincide with the existing archery season. Crossbow hunter numbers and harvests increased dramatically as a result of the expanded season. During that 20-year period, the deer population continued to grow and there was a corresponding increase in harvest by all types of deer hunters. Hunter success rates continued to climb.
By the 2001-02 season, crossbow hunter numbers had increased nearly 10 fold to an estimated 106,000. That year the crossbow season provided an estimated 1.8 million hunter-days of opportunity. Nearly 15 percent of crossbow hunters were successful that year. Vertical bowhunter numbers had increased to 88,000, with 15 percent successfully harvesting a deer that year. Hunter numbers and success rates increased for firearms hunters as well, but not to the extent of archers. The 2004-05 archery harvest was 60,626 -- 28 percent of the total harvest.
Another phenomenon occurred during the past 25 years, which has made bowhunting a very valuable management tool. Deer have taken up residence in our cities and towns in fairly large numbers. Bowhunting is often the most effective and efficient way to address overabundant deer in these areas. Cuyahoga County is a good example. The 2004-05 archery harvest was 443 -- 90 percent of the total county harvest. Although an insignificant contribution to the statewide harvest, the harvest represents over 400 animals that likely would have had to have been taken by less desirable means such as sharp shooting or automobiles. The crossbow accounted for the majority of the harvest.
Urban deer problems and problems associated with abundant deer are not unique to Ohio. What is unique is the central role that the crossbow has played in these situations.
Presently, Ohio is one of only seven states where crossbows are legal during the entire archery season. Many state fish and wildlife agencies are exploring nontraditional means for controlling white-tailed deer populations in areas with little or no hunting access. Communities and park systems across Ohio and the U.S. are increasingly employing sharpshooters to reduce local deer populations. Ongoing research in the Cleveland Metroparks is evaluating the feasibility of reducing a local deer population using only chemical fertility control.
In spite of its widespread success in Ohio, especially in our urban areas, few states are willing to consider adding the crossbow to their management toolbox because of resistance from a vocal minority of hunters.
They argue that it does not belong in the archery season and placing it there would reduce opportunity and/or bag limits for all hunters and, in extreme cases, decimate herds. Despite the controversy, many states see the crossbow as a partial solution to shrinking opportunity, an ever-increasing urban deer problem, and as an aid to bolster hunter recruitment and retention.
Crossbows were legalized for deer hunting in Ohio in 1976. Ohio’s estimated 1,400 crossbow hunters accounted for 27 of the 23,000 deer harvested that year.
The crossbow harvest exceeded the vertical bow harvest for the first time in 1989 and it has remained that way since. Approximately 30 percent of Ohio’s deer hunters use a crossbow each year. Annually, the crossbow accounts for roughly 15 percent of the total harvest. Much of this harvest comes from one of five urban deer units. These units were established in 1994 in areas traditionally prone to underharvest and overpopulation. The urban deer permit is good for an antlerless deer only. After a slow start, urban deer permit sales have ranged from 18,000 to 25,000 annually. In a typical year, the urban permit will account for around 5 percent of the total harvest, with approximately 35 percent of these deer taken with a crossbow.
Contrary to claims by anti-crossbow groups of herd decimation and severe restrictions on hunting opportunity and harvest, Ohio has never modified regulations governing crossbows or adjusted harvest regulations because of the crossbow. Modern firearms have, and will always account for the majority of the harvest and have the greatest impact on Ohio’s deer population. The crossbow has never had a significant statewide impact on the management of the deer herd. Ohio’s experience has shown that the crossbow is not an unsafe, hyper-effective hunting implement rivaled only by the shotgun. Hunter success rates are no higher than those for vertical bow hunters.
Additionally, the crossbow may help retain and recruit new hunters, especially youth and women.
The primary reason for reduced activity or desertion among active bowhunters is time constraints. Hence, any effort to make bowhunting more accessible, more convenient, or easier would help address the immediate issue of time constraints and the more important issue of hunting in general. Few would argue that the crossbow is much easier to master and remain proficient with that the vertical bow, or that many of the physical limitations imposed by the vertical bow cannot be overcome with the crossbow. Thus, it seems fair to say that the crossbow would help make bowhunting more accessible, easier, and more convenient.
Ohio’s deer resource will continue to provide our citizens with countless recreational opportunities, for both hunters and nonhunters alike, well into the near future. It will be the Division of Wildlife’s job to try to balance those opportunities with the human-deer conflict situations that will accompany them. Without question, bowhunting and most notably crossbow hunting, will continue to be a most valuable tool for the biologists who work to maintain this balance.