Who's Trophy is it anyway? Wounded Animals

[HankBuck]

Well thank you. I do appreciate it. More than likely, they probably did end up getting it. The trackers and PH's they had were something else. They tracked the impala wounded by someone in our party over 4-5 miles for a day and a half.

It just blows my mind how these guys will leave a track overnight, pick up on it the next day, and get the animal.

In retrospect, I would have gladly offered my 300WM to the PH. He had a 308 and that would have done it as well, though.

@HookMeUpII - I am always impressed by the African trackers —- for Me, if I follow a bleeding deer track in fresh snow and don’t lose it after a few 100 yards - I “think” I’m doing a good job.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

HookMeUpII: I think you made the right choice for several reasons - 1). Not your job to clean up someone else’s sloppy mess. 2). No reason for you to risk paying a $$Fee and especially for an animal that was already wounded by another Hunter (didn’t that hunter also have to pay a $$fee for drawing blood??). If your Guide wanted to help those other Hunters or put the animal out of its misery - HE SHOULD SHOOT IT

Yes. Someone should have shot it.

 

[Mtn_Infantry]

A hit in a leg that breaks bone may or may not be mortal. It is certainly serious. A year or two later, on that same piece of property, my buddy and I were hunting that same piece of property. I heard a shot and thought it would be my friend shooting. A radio call showed that it wasn't. A while later I saw a small buck making his way down off the ridge in my direction. I could see that he was.limping but could not see the actual injury. I saw that it was a forked-horn and could see no eye guards. Mule deer in Washington must have at least three points on one side, and an eye guard can be counted. At about 200 yards he turned and dropped of the two-track. I could see then that a back leg was broken above the knee and there was a lot of blood. Obviously a bullet wound. I was debating whether to kill him even though I was pretty sure he wasn't legal. I just hated seeing him suffer. Then he jumped the fence and was no longer on our lease. Game over. As he made his way up the hill I saw him stop and then fall down. He got back up and kept going until he was out of sight. I went down to where he crossed the fence and there was a huge amount of fresh blood. Disgusted, I started to make my way back to where my truck was. Going out ahead of me were two guys. Since they weren't with us they were poaching. I called out to them and said that I wanted to talk to them. They sped up trying to get out. I then called out, "Hey, did you guys lose a buck?" That got an answer, "Yeah, did you find him?" I told them that I knew where he was, so come down and talk to me. They and my buddy Wii got to me at about the same time. I told them I would show them where they crossed out of our property, but I then asked to see their hunting licenses. Once I knew their names and addresses I showed them where the buck had gone and it was up to them to.make it right and off the went. As soon as they crossed into the next property, I called the T at and Wildlife "Poaching Hot Line" and gave them all of the information. I do not know what happened after that. I can only hope that they suffered big fines.

See that’s where we’d disagree. A broken/blown off leg is serious but not necessarily mortal. I’ve see. More than one deer walking around on 3 legs. Got a buck by me that was hit by a car breaking one of the legs. He’s a little slower than the rest but been at it for almost a year.

 

[Doug Hamilton]

See that’s where we’d disagree. A broken/blown off leg is serious but not necessarily mortal. I’ve see. More than one deer walking around on 3 legs. Got a buck by me that was hit by a car breaking one of the legs. He’s a little slower than the rest but been at it for almost a year.

So where do we disagree? I also have seen deer survive a broken leg, but not always. I'm pretty sure that the buck I described would have died from the injury. Just too severe. As I said, a shot through the upper leg is serious, but may or may not be a mortal injury. It depends on the circumstances.

 

[Mtn_Infantry]

So where do we disagree? I also have seen deer survive a broken leg, but not always. I'm pretty sure that the buck I described would have died from the injury. Just too severe. As I said, a shot through the upper leg is serious, but may or may not be a mortal injury. It depends on the circumstances.

If the vitals or a major artery aren’t hit then it belongs to the shooter that inflicted a wound to one of those areas that would ensure the death of the animal IF they want it and weren’t doing the other hunter a favor.

 

[Ridge Runner]

Well thank you. I do appreciate it. More than likely, they probably did end up getting it. The trackers and PH's they had were something else. They tracked the impala wounded by someone in our party over 4-5 miles for a day and a half.

It just blows my mind how these guys will leave a track overnight, pick up on it the next day, and get the animal.

In retrospect, I would have gladly offered my 300WM to the PH. He had a 308 and that would have done it as well, though.

@HookMeUpII,

I'm with @HankBuck. Your PH should have done the buffoons' PH a favor and dispatched the wounded blesbok.

Any outfitter having a double dip policy like this needs to be called out; as I definitely wouldn't want to book with them.

Under the circumstances, reluctantly IMO, you made the right call by not making the kill shot because things could have gotten ugly when the buffoon that wounded the blesbok ended up paying for the blesbok as a lost animal, that you and your PH recovered as being your trophy animal.

 

[Ridge Runner]

@Hunt anything - I’ve Never seen a Hunter “kick or hit” another Hunter’s dog…that would be a risky move and I wouldn’t be surprised if an incident like that ended up in a fist fight.

Or a lot worse.
Some dog owners have a tendency to protect the family and/ or hunting dog better than their family.

 

[Doug Hamilton]

Where I grew up in Northern California, the buck belongs to whoever drew first blood. Over the years, I have been able to fun show several bucks and a hog that had been hit by other hunters. Never any question as to who claims it.

"fun show" ?
It was supposed to.say "finish". I really hate auto correct.

 

[Doug Hamilton]

I had this come up in RSA. There were 2 kids in camp that were bowhunting exclusively and sort of acted like real idiots. They were probably early mid-20's. They were just real buffoons and started to irritate people. Well, their bowhunting was on par with their manners and decorum. One of them wounded a blesbok with an arrow. It was walking around with an arrow sticking out of it. As such, it was super spooky and was bolting at any danger (supposedly).

We ended up running across it leaving the property to hunt another. My PH pointed it out. It was about a 300-400 yd shot. I was shooting 300WM. My PH said I had been shooting great and if I wanted to do them a favor I could give it a shot and maybe be the "hero." I started to get setup but then asked him "what if I wound it again." He said "Well, if you wound it again, then it's our problem." He saw me hesitate and reminded me I didn't have to do it. I declined.

It was difficult because as a hunter because ethically I should have probably taken the shot. I probably could have made it.

In my mind, I wasn't going to clean up one of those buffoons messes and then risk causing myself a headache if I missed. Rock and a hard place, basically.

Looking back, I consider myself a good shot and I probably could have made it. If it was 100-150 I probably would have taken the shot and done "the right thing." Looking back, even a not so great shot on a blesbok with 300WM probably would have been fatal anywhere in the midsection.

I imagine policies may differ, place to place. Their policy was next one to draw blood takes the responsibility, from what I understand.

I guess I.missed what you were saying. Do you mean that the PH wanted you to finish off a crippled animal, and then pay for it? That does not line up with anything that I've seen in Zimbabwe where any animal wounded and lost is paid for by the person that lost it. If that is the case in RSA then it was paid for by the bow hunter. If they wanted you to take it and also pay for it, they were acting in an unethical manner. If they just wanted you to take it out to be humane fine, but if not, like you I would have refused to take it. I would also never hunt with those guys again.

 

[HookMeUpII]

I guess I.missed what you were saying. Do you mean that the PH wanted you to finish off a crippled animal, and then pay for it? That does not line up with anything that I've seen in Zimbabwe where any animal wounded and lost is paid for by the person that lost it. If that is the case in RSA then it was paid for by the bow hunter. If they wanted you to take it and also pay for it, they were acting in an unethical manner. If they just wanted you to take it out to be humane fine, but if not, like you I would have refused to take it. I would also never hunt with those guys again.

I honestly don't think I know what they were implying to be honest. I know for a fact they notched it on the bow hunter. That was the policy for everything, as it should be. Draw blood, it's on you.

I understood that very well going there and that was literally, the most important thing I told myself.

I think they wanted me to help finish it off and the bow hunter would have paid/debited for it, and it would have gone to him. That didn't really strike me as a problem, for me. I'd have put a cripple out of it's misery and already had my blesbok in the salt.

Where it got confusing was if I had re-wounded it. I'm sure I could have pressed on with the details but had already decided at that point, not for me. This is where I was confused, in retrospect. But, I didn't push the issue because once again, I've made a life of making other people's problems my own for people much closer to me. I was there to enjoy myself, which I rarely get to do.

It was 300-400 yds off down a straight road/trail. I recall it only hanging around for about as long as it took for my PH to explain.

 

[HookMeUpII]

And I should say, I would absolutely hunt with that outfit again. My PH and the owner were incredibly accommodating. They didn't push that blesbok on me either.

I'm pretty confident they got the animal. A lot of the PH's came together for cripples/wounded animals.

 

[Hunt anything]

And I should say, I would absolutely hunt with that outfit again. My PH and the owner were incredibly accommodating. They didn't push that blesbok on me either.

I'm pretty confident they got the animal. A lot of the PH's came together for cripples/wounded animals.

When your PH said it would become your problem if you just wounded it again, he may have just been saying that you and he would lose valuable hunting time dealing with it. Just speculation of course.

 

[Ridge Runner]

And I should say, I would absolutely hunt with that outfit again. My PH and the owner were incredibly accommodating. They didn't push that blesbok on me either.

I'm pretty confident they got the animal. A lot of the PH's came together for cripples/wounded animals.

Seems then they were not trying to double dip on an animal

When PHs work together to assist another PH's client retrieve their wounded animal; you have a good outfitter and are around a good group of people.

Perhaps your PH offered the shot to you as he personally didn't feel comfortable in making that long of shot also?

Glad it all worked out for everyone.

 

[HookMeUpII]

Seems then they were not trying to double dip on an animal?

When PHs work together to assist another PH's client retrieve their wounded animal; you have a good outfitter and are around a good group of people.

Perhaps your PH offered the shot to you as he personally didn't feel comfortable in making that long of shot also?

Glad it all worked out for everyone.

When your PH said it would become your problem if you just wounded it again, he may have just been saying that you and he would lose valuable hunting time dealing with it. Just speculation of course.

I think that's the case. Meaning, we would have then ended up chasing it around had I re-wounded/additionally wounded it. At that point I still had a wildebeest and a warthog to take.

By no means did they try and double dip on the animal.

I guess I'm a good shot but never really considered myself to be. I just followed instructions, stayed calm, and practiced.

Pretty sure my PH had killed more game than I have actually personally seen in my life. He was a little peeved about the blesbok. He was a bowhunter himself and just shook his head.

 

[Ridge Runner]

When your PH said it would become your problem if you just wounded it again, he may have just been saying that you and he would lose valuable hunting time dealing with it. Just speculation of course.

Seems more clearer communication should have taken place.

 

[JeeperCreeper]

I've been reading a lot about it recently. In the States, I think some areas even have laws in it.

But it's definitely a moral/ethical dilemma of "first blood" vs "last breath".

Two recent instances have been interesting that's blown up on social media: the Von Benedict brother and another with a cop's son.

 

[Sabre]

In the states that I have read with specific laws on it, it seems the trend is whoever ultimately brings the animal down or delivers the finishing shot. I've read stories where that became a problem because a hunter would walk up on a mortally wounded trophy buck or bull and shoot it as it was about to die and then claim it as their own because they delivered the "fatal shot". Of course these situations are almost always hotly contested by the two parties.

Almost everyone I have ever hunted with seems to have similar mentality that the animal belongs to whoever delivered the first mortally wounding shot. So, if someone were to shoot something in the hoof and it ran past another hunter and the second hunter killed it, it would belong to the second hunter in our groups. If someone shot further back and it was guts liver and it ran past another person and they shot it, it would most likely go to the first shooter.

Obviously with this there is some grey area and as the rack gets bigger people are going to disagree more on what is or isn't a mortally wounding shot. But for the vast majority of situations it works out, and most the time people are good natured about it because they are friends and want to help each other out.

When you go to public land or when an animal crosses boundaries and it was on another property for one of the shots, of course this again makes it much more complex and more likely to end in disputes.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

Or a lot worse.
Some dog owners have a tendency to protect the family and/ or hunting dog better than their family.

Which is exactly why that guy reacted like he did. Protecting HIS dog. I get that.

 

[Ontario Hunter]

As far as I know, pretty much everywhere I have hunted in North America the dead animal belongs to the first one to get to it and tag it. It was not uncommon for an elk hunter/poacher to sneak in and discard the tag on a carcass and put his own tag on it while the shooter was gone getting horses. Easier to prove ownership today with time/dated GPS photos on phones. Many jurisdictions require the antlers to remain with the carcass until meat is removed (for obvious reasons) but I brought this rack out on my shoulders in 1971 when I went for horses. I kept the tag with me. Wasn't much worried about anyone stealing the meat from that gawd forsaken spot. But antlers were more portable. Half the meat came out the next day and front quarters two weeks later when the weather broke.