Why do some outfitters/leases charge less for bow hunters than they charge for hunters using a firearm? I have used both and now only use a firearm, so I understand the differences. In my experience, the bow is more difficult and much more work for a guide. Of course, there is no difference for most guides. The majority of the "guides" I have hunted with in the US are nothing more than the "gate keeper" of the land and their primary service is transporting the client back and forth.

success rate is lower in archery. read any harvest report from any state and you will see that the volume of archers who successfully harvest an animal versus that of a rifle hunter is significantly lower.

If I were to allow bow hunting I would charge them twice as much. When I did allow it the majority of them were twice as much trouble and finding the game that were shot were not near as easy as those that were shot with rifles.

I agree, as some one who guides bow hunters tend to be "picky" to the point of making the job as unpleasent as it can be.

Also while the success rate is much lower, from my experience the amount of wounded and lost animals is 2x+ as much when compared to rifle hunters.

don k and deewayne2003,
My thoughts exactly.

You are correct. Much easier to blast the animal from 300 yards away with a rifle...

When I had bow hunters some could not make a good shot on an animal at 15 yards. Buck fever does not only happen to rifle hunters. I am sure there are good bow hunters out there. I was unfortunate in not ever having one.

My intent is not to start a bow or firearm bashing thread. It was a sincere question based on what I have been experiencing lately when booking hunts and I am really confused. Bowtech makes a good point on the "much easier to blast the animal from 300 yards away with a rifle". Very true. But I see no difference in the tool or method if you are shooting an animal at 50 yards or less at a well established feeding area. We all have our own standards, morals and ethics as to what constitues a fair chase or challenge. A bow in the right hands is as deadly as anything at comparable, effective distances. So whether I use my traditional bow, handgun or rifle or the latest Tactical Sniper Super Short Fat Triple Pulley Nitro Flex Magnum Bow/Rifle/Handgun, a 50 yard or less shot off a tree stand at a permanent feeding area is exactly that. The tool is not relevant under those conditions.

Well I would expect to get a better price than a gun hunter because the chance of getting an animal is far less. I mean I'm going to pay as much as a gun hunter that just is not fair. The chance of seeing a deer at a close enough distance to shoot with a bow is FAR less than seeing it at 300 yards. Just my thoughts I hunt with both but as a bow hunter I would expect a cheaper price for the the entry fee but maybe a higher animal fee.

I charge the same price for the hunt and I don't care if your hunting it with a bow, rifle, handgun, or muzzleloader. My time out there and prep before a bow hunter arrives is usually a lot more than a rifle hunter. Deer feed and utilities, and all my other expenses are usually the same for every hunter except for bow hunters. In most cases, it takes a lot more care to try to get a bow hunter on the game. So therefore, I charge the same.

The difference in pricing of a hunt is due to the success rates of archery hunters vs. rifle hunters. It costs the same to put the hunt on. Management cost the same to improve the herd. In the early 90's The Shin Oak ranch to use this logic when booking hunts on their ranch. They based their pricing of their hunting experiences and success rates in South Texas. They learned real quickly that they bowhunters that hunted in the Hill Country had a much higher success rate in October vs. those in South Texas. The hunters also would not follow the guidelines on ages and scores on deer that closely either that they had in place. The Shin Oak went out of business after a short time. I have hunted both archery and rifle. I hunted Chaparral Wildlife Management area back in the 80's on an archery hunt. There was a guy that was camped next to us came to camp every night and told of missing a buck or a deer. He missed 4 shots before someone asked him how far his shots were. He said 80-90 yrds. They asked why so far..he said "You can't kill them unless you put some aluminum in the air" He also said that it was a free hunt and he did not care about how far the shot was. Today if I were to do an archery hunt it would be the same cost if not more than a rifle hunt. More prep and more time needed to have a successful hunt. Both methods of hunting have wounded game. The difference in the amount is quality of hunter in either method. If they respect the game and their abililty they will only take the ethical shot.

Wow Are "some" bowhunters "really" that bad?? I have been bow hunting for over 40 years and have killed over 100 deer with a bow and have never lost one. I understand that there are probably some hunters that should'nt be hunting with a bow but there are also just as many or more that should'nt have a firearm either. I have seen more deer lost due to poor shots with rifles than bows mainly due to the shooter thinking if they can see it they can kill it. To the outfitters out there please don't bunch "all bowhunters" in the same catagory. Just my 2 cents worth. God Bless

This is true in regards to ethics, my biggest problems came from bow hunters that hunted with a bow for "the challange" and liked to stick their chest out and tell people every chance they could about how bow hunting was a challange....

no argument there but these were the same people that would wound an animal and not tell any one. After the season I would walk the property and find dead deer that should have never been shot in the first place with arrows sticking out of the carcasses.

This is the reason that many properties are starting to charge the same if not more.

That lead me to take pictures of every bowhunter with one of their arrows so that we could tell who was doing it and often they would wound multiple deer.

IMO if a guy picks his bow up in Sept. and shoot's it a few times before Oct. and hunt's in Oct. then change's to rifle in Nov. He really has no buisness calling himself a bow hunter or even trying to bow hunt,My guess would be that's probably the one's that wound and lose alot of game, I know it happens, but practicing lower's the chance's IMO

I agree. Its guys like that who cause bowhunters to have a bad name. I havent lost an animal or had one run more than 60 yards in over ten years. We live, breathe, eat, and sleep bowhunting in my house. We shoot and hunt year round but if you put a rifle in our hands we would have a better chance at wounding game than we do with our bows because we dont shoot rifles enough. I personally havent even shot a rifle in probably five years and my wife has never shot a rifle in her life. So we stick to what we know best. Obviously there are some outfitters that frown upon our method of hunting so unfortunately we wont be able to hunt with them but there are plenty more places we can go hunt. I think the people who have a bad taste in their mouth for bowhunters need to realize there is a difference between a bowhunter and someone who hunts with a bow on occasion.

You are correct that the tool can be equally deadly, but it is much harder to get within 50 yards of a whitetail deer than it is to be 300 yards from them. That is what makes bowhunting more challenging.

from a landowners standpoint we were much more leary of bowhunters......we would interview them pretty hard before we would let them take a shot at a deer with a bow.

not to say bowhunters aren't deadly but from what I've seen firsthand they lose more game on average than rifle hunters

As landowners why don't yall have a proficiency test on ALL hunters prier to letting them hunt on your places. Lets say 30 yards for the bowhunter and 100 yards for the rifle hunter. No rests, all shooting offhand. My $$$$ will be on the bowhunters. I would take this challenge with a bow any day. Just a thought..

we do make them shoot in before the go into the field.....but a cool hand at the range dosen't equal a deadly hunter in the field.....botch a shot and stick a bullet in the shoulder instead of the lungs and its lights out for the deer.......not so much with an arrow

even the indians gave up sticks and strings when they got ahold of winchesters......

Yes it does help. But I think there are a few hunters out there with a bow that were never taught hunting ethics and what is a good shot oppportunity to take. That its more than just having an animal coming out in front of you and taking any shot you can. Some of them are good shots at still targets but stink at the real thing. I usually try my best to get to know the hunters. I like hearing that the bow hunters does a bit of 3D archery shoots in the off season and has lots of hunting experience. But we can't always pick and choose our customers. Sometimes we have to do a bit a teaching ourselves to the hunters and customers that we get because nobody else ever taught them how to hunt or about ethics of it. If they don't want to listen, they don't get invited back. We have to pass on what we have learned from experience to others. It makes our job harder but it can be well worth it. And I have had some rifle hunters that are about the same way. I'm not knocking one style of hunting over the other. It's the hunter itself that I'm talking about.

Going back to the original question: Bow hunters harvest less game. It's just a tougher sport and takes more skills. Therefore, lees damage(?) to the deer herd.

BTW, I don't bow hunt nor do I allow bow hunters on my land. I don't believe the average hunter of either kind has a lot of outdoor skills; especially when it comes to tracking wounded game. I do not like to see animals with arrows sticking out of them. And, yes, I've seen it several times. I have lost deer that I hit with a 30-06 so I'm not saying that it can't happen with a rifle.

I didnt realize there was such a division of hunters on the subject. I just always assumed that hunters supported other hunters because we have so many people against us as it is. Segregation amongst hunters is not good for our sport IMO. I am a bowhunter, thats all I do but I dont hold grudges or not allow people to come hunt with me just because they choose to shoot a rifle instead of a bow. It sounds like a bunch of high school kids in here. Every weapon out there wounds game and causes it to be lost. Its not just archery equipment. Ive lost way more deer and hogs with a gun than I have with a bow. Sure some people dont belong in the woods with a bow but some of those same people dont belong in the woods period. This whole " I dont allow bowhunters on my land thing" makes me want to vomit. I am sure the anti hunters that come on here and read our posts are sitting at lunch eating tofu salad grinning from ear to ear talking about how hunting is slowly fading away and how hunters are arguing amongst themselves and self destructing. And they dont even have to do anything except drive home in their Hybrid cars and laugh. Makes me wonder if PETA ever got it petitioned to vote to ban bowhunting how many hunters would vote yes. Makes me wanna puke.

x2