United blood tracks data on fixed blade vs mechanical

[Gator]

If the recovery rate for a pass-through is 38% higher than a non-pass-through, and a fixed-blade passes-through 33% more than a mechanical; how does it only yield a 5% higher recovery rate?

Most likely because the size of the wound channel.

 

[Gator]

I thought it went without saying that you want to hit the deer in the chest cavity. If that needs to be spelled out for someone, wrong hobby.

now, working on the assumption that everyone is trying to hit there, yes the two holes do matter. Deer die by two mechanisms bowhunting - hemorrhaging resulting in drop of blood pressure, resulting in loss of flow to brain/cardiac arrest(Lack of oxygen to the brain), and pneumothorax - the inability to inflate the lungs and breathe(lack of oxygen to the brain). Deer die when they don’t get oxygen to their brain and/or their heart stops.

if you get lucky, and you pierce the heart, or sever the major plumbing coming out the top/back of it, one hole will probably do just fine. But if you get unlucky and just get lungs, and don’t sever any big pipes, you’re gonna be in for a long night without that second hole.

i should havebeen more clear - if you intend to shoot a deer in the chest cavity, and succeed, two holes will lead to more recoveries than one, for the reasons outlined above.

You can toss in increased odds of a decent blood trail, but i imagine this doesn’t move the needle as much as we might think. This is anecdote, but I think pretty helpful most times.

I'll add on to this, this second hole is important in recovery because most of the time, the second hole is lower in the chest cavity and thus blood will leave this hole more often, leaving an easier to follow blood trail. If the arrow stops just short of exiting the back side skin, the internal damage piece is done, but the lessor blood trail will possibly make the deer harder to recover.

 

[Weldabeast]

I'm not that experienced at deer killing so I dont know the answer....just wondering what others think.

If u get a double lung, with or without a pass through, isnt the respiratory system a low blood pressure system? I would think blood will be coming out the nose more than arrow holes. Is that an good hypothesis or is my thinking way off?

 

[wayne r]

I'm not that experienced at deer killing so I dont know the answer....just wondering what others think.

If u get a double lung, with or without a pass through, isnt the respiratory system a low blood pressure system? I would think blood will be coming out the nose more than arrow holes. Is that an good hypothesis or is my thinking way off?

yes some will come out of the nose but most will fill the diaphram if you have an entry and no exit, depending on entry you might not get much dropping if any an exit lower down will give you good indication and importantly a better indication of shot placement to start follow up.

 

[Weldabeast]

 

[Allegheny Tom]

I'm not that experienced at deer killing so I dont know the answer....just wondering what others think.

If u get a double lung, with or without a pass through, isnt the respiratory system a low blood pressure system? I would think blood will be coming out the nose more than arrow holes. Is that an good hypothesis or is my thinking way off?

Yes, blood will blow out the nose, but it's often almost atomized into a mist that's so fine that it's easy to miss seeing it.

 

[EricS]

@Weldabeast with a low exit wound I typically find first blood within 5 yards of the shot location. Without a pass through or a high exit I don’t typically get blood coming from the nose and mouth for 30-40 yards.

 

[DB4x4]

I haven’t read the article. Is it safe to assume if the United Blood Trackers are involved in the numbers that the easy to find deer were recovered without calling the ubt?

I thought the same thing when I started reading this. This is likely data associated with deer that were shot poorly. If they were shot well, the hunter probably wouldn't need the UBT.

Any deer shot with an arrow outside of the "boiler room", I wouldn't expect to find.

 

[stevethebreeze]

Good night that thing was Uge!!!!

 

[Allegheny Tom]

.......Any deer shot with an arrow outside of the "boiler room", I wouldn't expect to find.

When handled the right way, a gut shot deer should be recovered.




Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

 

[GCTerpfan]

I know everyone is on the FOC and Ranch Fairy craze right now but the data that is being used as a benchmark doesn't even compute.

According to United Blood Trackers (Which other than personal rhetoric, is the only data I've seen documented).

"-Mechanical broad head recovery rate is 41%
-Fixed blade recovery was 46%
-Mechanical pass through rate of 41%
- Fixed blade pass through rate of 74%
-Recovery rate for pass through a was 59%
-non-pass through a was only 21% "

If the recovery rate for a pass-through is 38% higher than a non-pass-through, and a fixed-blade passes-through 33% more than a mechanical; how does it only yield a 5% higher recovery rate?

I'm not disputing whether or not it's beneficial to have a heavier arrow or which broadhead should be used; rather, does this make sense to anyone?

It's been a long time since I had a Statistics class but, my guess is that the reason the data doesn't appear to make sense is because of different sample sizes. Let's assume that there were 100 mechanical and 1000 fixed blades in the study. That means 41 out of 100 mechs passed through and 740 out of 1000 fixed blades passed through for a total pass through rate of 781/1100 (71%). Now lets assume there were 1000 mechs and 100 fixed blades in the study. That means 410/1000 mechs passed through and 74/100 fixed blades passed through for a total pass through of 484/1100 (44%). So you have the same individual pass through rates but, a discrepancy of 27% on the total pass through rate. I haven't really dug into the numbers beyond this to try to answer your specific questions but, You can see how different sample sizes can make the data look skewed, On top of that the total percentage of recovery for pass through and non pass through combined is only 80%, so there is 20% of the data not accounted for. Without seeing the raw numbers it's hard to draw many conclusions from the percentages.

 

[TK161BOONER]

A deer recovery? Or a hunters recovery of the deer? Or does the hunter ever recover if a deer recovers?
Sorry just thought I’d say something funny to follow this post LOL.

Sorry, my brother hit three bucks between 150” to 160”in the last two years and he has still not recovered from it... but the deer have LOL.

 

[DB4x4]

When handled the right way, a gut shot deer should be recovered.




Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

I agree, but when you check your arrow, only to find that there's very little blood and it smells like ****, are you "expecting" to find it, or "hoping" to find it? haha

 

[Kurt]

I know everyone is on the FOC and Ranch Fairy craze right now but the data that is being used as a benchmark doesn't even compute.

According to United Blood Trackers (Which other than personal rhetoric, is the only data I've seen documented).

"-Mechanical broad head recovery rate is 41%
-Fixed blade recovery was 46%
-Mechanical pass through rate of 41%
- Fixed blade pass through rate of 74%
-Recovery rate for pass through a was 59%
-non-pass through a was only 21% "

If the recovery rate for a pass-through is 38% higher than a non-pass-through, and a fixed-blade passes-through 33% more than a mechanical; how does it only yield a 5% higher recovery rate?

I'm not disputing whether or not it's beneficial to have a heavier arrow or which broadhead should be used; rather, does this make sense to anyone?

What I see is ; fixed has a higher recovery rate over all, fixed has more pass throughs over all, and more pass throughs result in more deer recovered ( two holes are better than one) . These numbers are based on a sample of marginally hit deer to begin with, otherwise why would you call a tracker.
What the data tells me is to shoot fixed, and increase your odds of pass through with broadhead selection, and implementation all other penetration increasing techniques,ie; tune your bow, shoot heavier, shoot stiffer, shoot sharper. Are you sure these numbers didn't come from Ashby or the RF?

 

[Gator]

I agree, but when you check your arrow, only to find that there's very little blood and it smells like ****, are you "expecting" to find it, or "hoping" to find it? haha

With a wide cut broadhead and not pushed, I expect to find them. I've found gut shot deer dead the next day 30 yards from where they were shot, just have to leave them alone.

 

[kyler1945]

It's been a long time since I had a Statistics class but, my guess is that the reason the data doesn't appear to make sense is because of different sample sizes. Let's assume that there were 100 mechanical and 1000 fixed blades in the study. That means 41 out of 100 mechs passed through and 740 out of 1000 fixed blades passed through for a total pass through rate of 781/1100 (71%). Now lets assume there were 1000 mechs and 100 fixed blades in the study. That means 410/1000 mechs passed through and 74/100 fixed blades passed through for a total pass through of 484/1100 (44%). So you have the same individual pass through rates but, a discrepancy of 27% on the total pass through rate. I haven't really dug into the numbers beyond this to try to answer your specific questions but, You can see how different sample sizes can make the data look skewed, On top of that the total percentage of recovery for pass through and non pass through combined is only 80%, so there is 20% of the data not accounted for. Without seeing the raw numbers it's hard to draw many conclusions from the percentages.

I suspect the delta between recovery with pass through versus not, will hold once all other variables are accounted for. It may not be a 3x increase. But I think we’d be making a mistake to assume that difference doesn’t matter in what we do.

It’s probably impossible to get a data set big enough to put this stuff on stone tablets for every situation. But that doesn’t mean we can’t draw some conclusions here.

 

[DB4x4]

With a wide cut broadhead and not pushed, I expect to find them. I've found gut shot deer dead the next day 30 yards from where they were shot, just have to leave them alone.

You must not have a lot of coyotes in your area...

 

[Bowmanmike]

You must not have a lot of coyotes in your area...

If you dont bump a poorly hit deer it doesn't travel far to leave a scent trail for the coyotes. If you bump it and it runs 1000 yds the coyotes have a great chance to cross that trail. I had to leave a doe overnight last season and was nervous about it since we have a healthy coyote population.
I found her the next morning not 70 yards from the hit site.

 

[Kurt]

I'm not that experienced at deer killing so I dont know the answer....just wondering what others think.

If u get a double lung, with or without a pass through, isnt the respiratory system a low blood pressure system? I would think blood will be coming out the nose more than arrow holes. Is that an good hypothesis or is my thinking way off?

A low exit wound ( think elevated position) will give the best blood trails generally. You'll get some nasal spray but I'm looking for blood to pour(drain) out of the low exit. Deer can live with a single lung hit, and deer hit high with no exit like my double lung hit on my buck last year are a bitch to find.

 

[Kurt]

We have some coyotes, best to find them deer after the shot. If you have to leave them for any time here you won't find them whole. My buck ran a total of 100yds before dying and he died way before I started to look for him. Double lung, No exit wound, poor blood trail, morning recovery, and I still only got the front half of the deer after the yotes were done. If I had the exit wound I would have found that deer after the shot.