• The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
  • We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules

"A Slow, Deliberate, Emotionless, Open Conversation" About Hunting Accidents

LoadedLimbs said:
It does seem that way, and it IS negligent.

I think sometimes the mind assembles the fragmented sensory inputs and makes split second conclusions that are invalid - and the person sees what they expected to see. There are plenty of instances where the shooter “was convinced they saw the game they were hunting”.

Turkey hunting mistakes aren’t so hard for me to comprehend:

A sleep-deprived person getting up early enough to be in position well before daylight; Full camo / no hunter orange; Low light; Gobbler calling in close proximity - maybe even closing in; Thick cover; Inexperienced, excited hunter who hasn’t observed a lot of game in the woods previously; Adrenaline rush as the movement comes into view…
Click to expand...
This concept has been studied to some extent by the hunter ed community and the NWTF. There was awhile where turkey hunting shooting incidents were going up quite rapidly. Stalking to a calling turkey are a bad mix. We tell our students to never stalk a turkey, always set up and try to call it to you. This simple decision I would estimate has mitigated the risk exponentially as it "saves" both the stalker and the stalkee if you will. The NWTF came up with a concept called "premature closure" where a person puts stimuli together and comes to an erroneous conclusion. That's why we pound in our students.... Know your target and what's beyond it before you pull the trigger. Knowing your target is a deer, turkey, bear, not anything else. It boggles my mind too.
 
hokiehunter373 said:
It's been that way as long as I can remember. And @HuumanCreed sentence is spot on in wording for the seasons but just want to clarify that during those seasons, even if you're archery hunting, you still have to wear orange. As it should be.
Click to expand...
Agreed, however It does feel somewhat silly if in a tree in an archery only area.
 
I dont think every one should be climbing trees ,especialy if you aint comfortable. If you are worried about your capabilities, method,or gear being strong enough , you should stay on the ground.you are a liability to yourself and posibly your familys source of income.dont mean to hurt feelings but if i do, im cool with that.however i have only been scoped with a rifle on the ground, and the only guy i know hwo was shot was on the ground.i dont know any one who has fallen from trees hunting, personaly, but i know people who have fallen from trees.however people dont realy hunt from trees in oregon like they do in other states.take it for what it is.its just some dorks opinion.
 
Forgot about the thread until now. Thanks for following up MDers.

I think the takeaway is that there are proportionately more self-inflicted injuries, primarily involving deer and elevated hunting positions, than firearms but hunting is still a very safe activity. You're not likely to get shot and it's a statistically, unwarranted fear. I still hesitate to take my kid out when I think there'll be other hunters around...
 
So quick Google-fu reveals that alabama has around 200,000 registered deer hunters. Alabama is 52,419 square miles in size.

New York is 54,455 square miles in size with 700,000 registered deer hunters.

Put over triple the hunters into a season half as long with no hunter orange, and I can see increased firearms-related injuries.
 
Nutterbuster said:
So quick Google-fu reveals that alabama has around 200,000 registered deer hunters. Alabama is 52,419 square miles in size.

New York is 54,455 square miles in size with 700,000 registered deer hunters.

Put over triple the hunters into a season half as long with no hunter orange, and I can see increased firearms-related injuries.
Click to expand...

Is it really increased?

Shouldn't the data be considered with respect to incident per hunter?

Alabama averaged 7.4 firearms incidents per year over the 5 year period you've shared data for. Ny 10 year average is 17.6.

7.4 is .0037% of 200000

17.6 is .0025% of 700000

So there are actually fewer firearms related incidents in NY per hunter than Alabama based on this data.

Even then that tells us very little other than the percentages are very small, as we don't know time afield to make a contextually accurate comparison.
 
Plebe said:
Is it really increased?

Shouldn't the data be considered with respect to incident per hunter?

Alabama averaged 7.4 firearms incidents per year over the 5 year period you've shared data for. Ny 10 year average is 17.6.

7.4 is .0037% of 200000

17.6 is .0025% of 700000

So there are actually fewer firearms related incidents in NY per hunter than Alabama based on this data.

Even then that tells us very little other than the percentages are very small, as we don't know time afield to make a contextually accurate comparison.
Click to expand...
Yeah, crappy thinking and worse communicating on my end.

The thing that wrinkles my forehead about NY is that there are more firearms-related incidents than falls, which is opposite Maryland and Alabama, and the nationwide data somebody posted earlier.

The intended thought was:


Put over triple the hunters into a season half as long with no hunter orange, and I can see a change in my risk-assessment. Climbing to get away from bullets starts to perhaps make more sense in New York based on the information I've now seen. At least if it's firearms season.
 
Honestly, it makes me wonder if there are some reporting issues (e.g., maybe NY under reports tree stand falls). Regardless, the odds of a firearm incident in either state are essentially zero.
 
Bdwilliams said:
Regardless, the odds of a firearm incident in either state are essentially zero.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's something we can pull from the data. It's a sample size, and we have no idea the ratio of sampled to actual events. Or at least I don't.

I think what we can surmise that you're generally more likely to hurt yourself than to be hurt by somebody else while hunting, and at least in general climbing a tree to avoid an injury from 2nd-party gunfire is going to incur more risk than it negates.

My personal takeaway is hunt from the ground, wear your orange, be religious about firearms handling, and refuse to hunt with buddies who don't share that trait.
 
From https://www.realtree.com/deer-hunting/galleries/10-researched-facts-about-tree stand-falls-you-should-know dated 2018
  • 42% of fall victims are 35 to 54 years old
  • Of the falls, 31% were from lock-ons, 25% were from climbers, 20% were from ladder stands, 20% were homemade stands and 4% were box stands/tripods
  • Of the falls, 45% were archery hunters, 39% were modern firearm hunters, 11% were muzzleloader hunters and 5% were crossbow hunters
  • Of the falls, 23% occurred while climbing up, 15% while transitioning to platform, 40% occurred while on stand, 22% occurred while climbing down
  • Causes of falls: 28% due to slipping or losing grip, 16% stand strap failure, 11% human error, 8% stand failure, 7% step/ladder failure
  • 85.5% had no harness with them, 14.5% had a harness with them but either took it off, we’re not connected or used it improperly
  • 91% of the falls resulted in injury and 9% resulted in death. Of the deaths, 90.2% were not wearing a harness. Of the injuries, 85.2% were not wearing a harness
 
Hey @Nutterbuster did you find any statistics on public vs private? Thought I would ask that question over here. Are the elevated falls on private property? And the shootings on public? Would like to see some comparison.

Just thinking private guy setting up his stands and comfortable on his home turff, versus mobile guy..
 
MattMan81 said:
Hey @Nutterbuster did you find any statistics on public vs private? Thought I would ask that question over here. Are the elevated falls on private property? And the shootings on public? Would like to see some comparison.

Just thinking private guy setting up his stands and comfortable on his home turff, versus mobile guy..
Click to expand...
Alabama doesn't track that. I don't think Maryland or New York does either. I can't see a reason why state agencies would.
 
Nutterbuster said:
I don't think that's something we can pull from the data. It's a sample size, and we have no idea the ratio of sampled to actual events. Or at least I don't.
Click to expand...

True but considering the number of hunters that hit the woods (dozens to hundreds of thousands per state) if there were an appreciable number of firearm incidents with hunters we'd know about it. Right?
 
Bdwilliams said:
True but considering the number of hunters that hit the woods (dozens to hundreds of thousands per state) if there were an appreciable number of firearm incidents with hunters we'd know about it. Right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, my bad. We talked earlier about that. I'd say shootings are definitely getting reported and the sample to real ratio is quite high. Hard to get shot and not end up with doctors and LEOs and reporters and such involved.

Falls? Probably less attention attracted.
 
Bdwilliams said:
Honestly, it makes me wonder if there are some reporting issues (e.g., maybe NY under reports tree stand falls). Regardless, the odds of a firearm incident in either state are essentially zero.
Click to expand...
The DEC said that they do believe the number of elevated hunting incidents is understated.
 
Last edited:
ofor said:
From https://www.realtree.com/deer-hunting/galleries/10-researched-facts-about-tree stand-falls-you-should-know dated 2018
  • 42% of fall victims are 35 to 54 years old
  • Of the falls, 31% were from lock-ons, 25% were from climbers, 20% were from ladder stands, 20% were homemade stands and 4% were box stands/tripods
  • Of the falls, 45% were archery hunters, 39% were modern firearm hunters, 11% were muzzleloader hunters and 5% were crossbow hunters
  • Of the falls, 23% occurred while climbing up, 15% while transitioning to platform, 40% occurred while on stand, 22% occurred while climbing down
  • Causes of falls: 28% due to slipping or losing grip, 16% stand strap failure, 11% human error, 8% stand failure, 7% step/ladder failure
  • 85.5% had no harness with them, 14.5% had a harness with them but either took it off, we’re not connected or used it improperly
  • 91% of the falls resulted in injury and 9% resulted in death. Of the deaths, 90.2% were not wearing a harness. Of the injuries, 85.2% were not wearing a harness
Click to expand...

A rare feather in the cap for crossbow hunters.

Nice work boys!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top