Success rate by weapon choice as a function of advancing technology

[idelkslayer]

I came across this graph while reading through some Idaho elk management information. The effects of advancing technology on harvest success has been debated in the past but this is the first time I've seen a graph that illustrates how this has changed over time. I did some quick looking at past general season harvest stats to see what else might be contributing to the increasing success rates of "primitive" weapons.

I looked at harvest stats from 2023 and 2001 to compare general archery and rifle seasons. I was curious how the month long archery seasons might play a role compared to the 2-3 week long rifle seasons typical across Idaho. The average rifle hunter spent 5.6 days in the field compared to 7.5 day average for archery hunters. So we see that for an archer to achieve success near the rate of rifle hunters requires nearly 2 more days of hunting.

Archery hunters in 2023 spent 10% more time in the field than archery hunters in 2001 (6.8 days). I interpret this to mean that some of the increased success of archery hunters could be attributed to more time spent in the field. By comparison rifle hunters also increased their time in the field from an average of 4.6 days in 2001 to 5.6 days in 2023. The additional day of rifle hunting didn't change success rates much. This appears to support the idea that technology definitely plays a role in the increased success of archery hunters. But I do think it is still a combination of increased time afield and advancing technology.

The total number of archery hunters increased from ~15,000 in 2001 to ~27,000 in 2023. Rifle hunters went from ~41,000 in 2001 to ~48,000 in 2023. In some Idaho elk zones there is overlap in archery and rifle elk hunters as some zones allow hunters to participate in both. Elk populations and total harvest have also increased over that 20 year period. It seems like the growing elk population was more or less able to keep up with increasing harvest success.

My preliminary conclusion is that the increase in archery/muzzleloader success rates has been sustainable so far because the elk population has grown enough to keep up with the technology. Idaho sustained a steady 20,000+ harvest for the last 10 years (with the exception of 2023) If the technology continues to increase or if current technology becomes more easily available, it could lead to changes in archery and muzzleloader season structure and opportunity in the future.

It is also interesting to see how little the rifle success rate has changed in the 40 years depicted in the graph. Advancements in long range hunting tech appear to have had a much smaller effect on harvest success than those in the archery and muzzleloader world.

 

[Felix40]

That is pretty interesting.

Doesn’t Idaho have pretty restrictive muzzleloader regs compared to a lot of other states?

 

[idelkslayer]

That is pretty interesting.

Doesn’t Idaho have pretty restrictive muzzleloader regs compared to a lot of other states?

Yes, Idaho does have more restrictive muzzleloader rules than many other states. However, Idaho does allow for inline muzzleloaders that meet the requirements. The quality of muzzleloaders has definitely improved in the last 20 years not to mention 40 years. They are more reliable, consistent, and accurate than ever before. There are many options available today for improved sights with a better sight picture and adjustments than were available 20 years ago. I also suspect that a greater availability of quality projectiles has increased accuracy and hunters willingness to try longer ranges, but that is speculation.

I neglected it in the first post but Muzzleloader hunters have increased their average days hunted from 2.9 to 3.8 from 2001 to 2023. At first glance an increase of only 1 day doesn't seem like much but it represents an increase in effort by 30%. The info in my first post shows that archery and rifle hunting effort only increased by 10% and 20% respectively.

 

[crossone]

Great info. Thanks. Here is my opinion and experience with Idaho's current muzzleloader only rules...

The muzzleloader projectiles allowed by the Idaho Fish and Game have made nothing easier since their Lead Bullets Only rule went into effect 10 - 20 years ago. Meaning, for muzzleloader only seasons, the bullet must be made entirely of lead or lead alloy. No copper only bullets, no copper or nickel jackets. No plastic tips. Also, bullets must be within 5 - 10 thousandths of the bore diameter. No sabots. The lead only rule also greatly diminishes the amount of powder that you can use in your rifle. The bullets are so soft that if you put more than 100 grains, or so, of powder in your gun, the lead bullets don't engage the rifling properly and just go tearing straight down the bore, pealing lead off on the rifling. My first experience with this, I took my new inline to the range, loaded it up with the required lead-only bullet in front of 150 grains of Triple 7, and torched off a shot, missed by an inch or two at 100 yards. The second shot was close to the first, the 3rd shot was off by a foot or so, and the 4th, 5th, and 6th shots were completely off of the plywood. When I got home and started cleaning, I would get long ribbons of lead out of the bore. After enough cleaning, I eventually got it to where it would shoot ok with 90 - 100 grain loads. Never better than ok. The lead only bullet move really limited what you can do with a muzzleloader in Idaho.

 

[JohnJohnson]

There are people on this forum who genuinely believe long range hunting has a real impact on game populations. It baffles me.

 

[SirChooCH]

Its interesting how much archery has closed the gap in a state that doesn't allow everyone to use a crossbow. A lot of hunters tote how much harder and more hardcore hunting with a bow is, but the success rates are getting pretty close.

 

[ozyclint]

people can shoot a bow as far as a rifle these days.

 

[TaperPin]

To me it looks like a jump around 2000ish and archery and muzzleloaders are rather flat since then. I have no idea what other factors have affected Idaho seasons and restrictions, but shortly before 2000ish is when the internet really took off and instead of relying on magazines and hunting videos, every Tom Dick and Harry could join a message board and share information. I had the only crude backpack hunting website that was searchable on Alta vista, and everyone was hungry for information.

Rifle hunting doesn’t surprise me - we tend to think everyone is like us, but most grab a new box of 30-06 once a year, ”sight in” a couple inches high at 100 with a group that looks like a shotgun, not to mention scopes that don’t dial, and head off with their buddies. Lol

The late 1990’s we were shooting over draws with aluminum arrows, but not far behind carbon arrows. Laser rangefinders were common across the board. Many of us were shooting to 450 yards without dialing. Everyone with a silhouette rifle were used to shooting to 500 meters. I don’t think any of that compares to the boom in information.

 

[Customweld]

One thing to note is 11 out of the 22 zones have a muzzleloader season. 8 of those units are antlerless, 3 are spike/ antlerless only. All but 2 of those hunts are late November through December. The legislature tried to upend the muzzleloader rules this session. Luckily, that got shot down (pun intended!) If you have hunted in late November and December, you know that even with a modern in line muzzy, it's still a challenge. I'm not necessarily defending muzzy hunts, but let's face it, they certainly don't have a ton of choice hunts.

 

[idelkslayer]

There are people on this forum who genuinely believe long range hunting has a real impact on game populations. It baffles me.

I had not taken a detailed look at whether success rates had changed in any of the units I am most familiar with but I would have thought long range hunting had a greater impact. The years between 2010 and the present show success rates consistently above the trendline so there may be some amount of impact but it is definitely less than I previously thought.

 

[Customweld]

As a side note, @idelkslayer, I always appreciate your arguments. You provide non emotional, data based info.

 

[BigNate]

Idaho archery now generally encompasses the rut. Definitely an advantage.

 

[Michael Rankin]

I started archery hunting somewhere around 2004.

I don’t think I have seen any technology changes in archery since I started that would lead to any higher success.

 

[Customweld]

I started archery hunting somewhere around 2004.

I don’t think I have seen any technology changes in archery since I started that would lead to any higher success.

Maybe not a technology change, but in 07, they increased let off to 85 percent. I don’t know how much of an impact that made.

 

[idelkslayer]

I started archery hunting somewhere around 2004.

I don’t think I have seen any technology changes in archery since I started that would lead to any higher success.

I think that some very subtle changes could be contributing. Improvements in sights, arrows, rests, and broadheads all contribute to increased accuracy and consistency. That builds confidence. Bows have become easier to tune and are more forgiving in general making it easier to become proficient. Range finders are more common than even in the early 2000's and have improved in terms of angle compensation and functionality.

Another factor that I didn't mention before but actually did come up in the Idaho report is the impact of ease of information brought on by the internet. It's never been easier to learn archery, elk habits, and hunting locations.

As previously stated, I don't think the additional effort in terms of hunter days can be discounted either. It definitely seems like a combination of tech, information, and effort.

It does seem like archery innovation has slowed down. It will be interesting to see what this graph looks like in 10 years. My guess would be a plateau in archery success but who knows.

 

[Customweld]

I think that some very subtle changes could be contributing. Improvements in sights, arrows, rests, and broadheads all contribute to increased accuracy and consistency. That builds confidence. Bows have become easier to tune and are more forgiving in general making it easier to become proficient. Range finders are more common than even in the early 2000's and have improved in terms of angle compensation and functionality.

Another factor that I didn't mention before but actually did come up in the Idaho report is the impact of ease of information brought on by the internet. It's never been easier to learn archery, elk habits, and hunting locations.

As previously stated, I don't think the additional effort in terms of hunter days can be discounted either. It definitely seems like a combination of tech, information, and effort.

It does seem like archery innovation has slowed down. It will be interesting to see what this graph looks like in 10 years. My guess would be a plateau in archery success but who knows.

I would agree that besides a few tweaks here and there, archery technology has advanced about as far as physics will let it. You can only push an arrow so fast.

 

[eightyeight mag]

Hunting during the rut is a tremendous advantage. Move bow season to November and watch harvest rates plummet.

 

[kylem]

Another factor that I didn't mention before but actually did come up in the Idaho report is the impact of ease of information brought on by the internet. It's never been easier to learn archery, elk habits, and hunting locations.

As previously stated, I don't think the additional effort in terms of hunter days can be discounted either. It definitely seems like a combination of tech, information, and effort.

I think these two have a much bigger impact on archery success than advancing technologies. Not saying tech has had no impact, but I simply believe the amount of information on elk hunting easily available online and spending more days afield have the biggest impact on success rates.

 

[Jellymon1]

I laugh every time I see someone say we’re able to shoot game at 100yds with modern bows. From what I’ve seen at 3D shoots most people shouldnt even be shooting game at 50yds. Bows actually haven’t changed all that much the last 15 years.

 

[Idaboy]

Not sure those rates are really that different in past 22 yrs and one could argue that pre 2005 archery tech definitely changed. Couldn't the harvest rates for past 20yrs be attributed to elk population, and elk population was at its highest in 2015?