PDA

View Full Version : Hunting Etiquette



snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:46 AM
Hunting Etiquette
From: Joe M
Category: Category 1
Date: 10 Dec 2002
Time: 11:09:18 -0500

Comments
You shoot an animal. It is injured and you track it. Another person delivers a fatal shot. Who's animal is it? Are there any circumstances that would change your answer?

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:47 AM
From: Kevin
Category: Category 1
Date: 10 Dec 2002
Time: 12:31:45 -0500
Remote Name: 204.188.103.231

Comments
I operate on the belief that the first fellow to shoot it gets it. And once there is a bullet hole in the animal, then the goal is to put it down quickly.
And the only time I would change that opinion is if the first shooter was shooting illegally or flagrantly unethically. Under those circumstances, he didn't deserve the animal anyway. But we all make mistakes, and if you don't hit well, and I can put him down, he's yours under normal circumstances.
I did take and keep a goose that a fellow skybusted from about 120 yds up, that dropped and came down into my decoys. Had he shot at less than 60 yards, I would have given it to him.
Besides, who needs a fight between armed men in the woods?

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:47 AM
From: Patrick
Category: Category 1
Date: 10 Dec 2002
Time: 14:40:57 -0500
Remote Name: 172.134.212.11

Comments
Joe--
Something tells me you have a specific incident to discuss? Even if you don't, this is a tantalizing, and educational topic for discussion.
Patrick

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:48 AM
From: tom
Category: Category 1
Date: 10 Dec 2002
Time: 15:10:13 -0500
Remote Name: 64.52.22.130

Comments
Great question...was the first shot enough to kill the animal, given enough time, or just a wound it could recover from? This happened to me once and I'm interested in your thoughts and experience.

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:48 AM
From: Levi
Category: Category 1
Date: 10 Dec 2002
Time: 15:46:47 -0500
Remote Name: 67.1.68.179

Comments
I think this is a discussion which could fill many a pages, but will try to confine myself to a few thoughts. Have shot and successfully killed 3 bull elk over the course of a dozen seasons and had somebody else tag them before I got to them. First time it happened I was quite upset, 2nd time I was just dazed, and the third time I simply shrugged my shoulders, walked away, and chalked it up to experience. I am sure this has been the experience of many other hunters on this board possibly who have chased elk around the boundaries of Yellowstone Park. Today, I choose not to hunt these areas for the most part, but if I do go there I have come to expect that though I may shoot an elk my tag may not be put on the animal. To ask is this ethical hunting...I'm not sure. For the most part the animals are cleanly taken as so far as I have witnessed, which is truely the most important thing. I can say that this same area has produced some wonderful memories, and some great times for me and my hunting partners. Just a bit to western for my tastes now days.
Levi

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:49 AM
From: paoniacoyote
Category: Category 1
Date: 10 Dec 2002
Time: 16:15:11 -0500
Remote Name: 67.225.189.114

Comments
I started hunting with the ethic, that whoever draws first blood gets the animal. It is also the responsibility of whoever draws first blood to do whatever it takes to recover it. That is still my philosophy. I know that the Colorado DOW says that whoever puts in the last killing shot owns it. I like the first blood rule, because it is the easiest to determine and determines the responsibility for tracking down if necessary. If I observed a wounded animal, I would put it down and give to anyone who came a tracking from the same direction. I once shot an elk after another hunter missed it five times. He was upset, but I told him that if I found two holes in it that it was his elk. He didn't offer to help skin it to find out and it only had one hole.

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:50 AM
From: Allen Wilson
Category: Category 1
Date: 10 Dec 2002
Time: 16:20:00 -0500
Remote Name: 208.186.178.132

Comments
Under the perameters of the scenario that you gave, the game animal belongs to the other hunter. The animal was only wounded. It was being tracked to be finished IF successfully tracked. The other person delivered a better placed, fatal shot.

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:50 AM
From: Joe M
Category: Category 1
Date: 10 Dec 2002
Time: 23:25:10 -0500
Remote Name: 24.237.208.180

Comments
I will be happy to share my experience after the philosophical discussion. The specifics of my story really aren't important, being in Alaska I never even thought about it.It seems we need rules like golfers have. Should there be specifics to the rules? For example, Size of animal and difficulty to kill; Distance of fatal shot from area of initial shot; Did the initial shot have the ability to be fatal and if so in what period of time; would the animal have presented itself to the second hunter if the first didn't shoot it; what would Boone & Crockett rule? We as hunters need to agree on these things so that we may coexist peacefully!

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:50 AM
From: Kevin
Category: Category 1
Date: 10 Dec 2002
Time: 23:33:48 -0500
Remote Name: 12.86.31.239

Comments
Your solution is too complicated. This is hunting, not nuclear physics. Simple, easy rules we can follow under stress.

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:51 AM
From: GH
Category: Category 2
Date: 11 Dec 2002
Time: 10:25:13 -0500
Remote Name: 12.252.5.142

Comments
My feeling on this matter is that the hunter who finishes the animal off should keep it. If the shot was a good one from the initial hunter, then the animal should have gone down without much opportunity for others to claim the kill. However, these matters are not always completely clear in the case of areas with an overabundance of hunters. I look at it this way...If another hunter takes the animal which I first shot, there are some benefits. I know that I was able to hit and successfully track an animal. I do not have to carry the animal out. Most importantly, the hunt is not over for me! On the last day of the season, I may not feel this giving. However, I enjoy seeing anyone have some luck, and I would expect someone to put an animal down as quickly as possible had I not been able to do so myself.

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:52 AM
From: Levi
Category: Category 1
Date: 11 Dec 2002
Time: 16:33:37 -0500
Remote Name: 67.1.69.68

Comments
Ed, please don't interpret my story to mean that all of elk hunting in Montana is like the incidents that I wrote about. Infact in 99% of the places it is probably not like that. Just thought I'd relish some interesting experiences with you fellas/ladies here on the board about some of the experiences I've had on the good old "Firing Line". Hope you get your tag in 2003!
Levi

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:52 AM
From: shu
Category: Category 1
Date: 11 Dec 2002
Time: 16:54:02 -0500
Remote Name: 165.234.94.111

Comments
Joe--
I believe that if I shoot at an animal, even if it appears it was a clean miss, I have an obligation to walk the area and search for any indication of a hit. If I wound an animal it is my responsibility to find it. If someone else were to kill the animal before I could, then it would be theirs--I had an opportunity and failed where they did not. If I wound an animal and do not find it (this has happened once) I close-out my tag and my hunt is over.
I have been in situations where another has claimed game I have shot. In every instance I have given them the animal and continued hunting. While I see no reason for someone to have claim to an animal simply because they were able to wound it, I have little desire to keep an animal shot-up by someone else.
Anyone who would claim an animal they did not shoot is a thief, not a hunter.
shu

snowdevil
01-13-2003, 11:53 AM
From: Ed C
Category: Category 1
Date: 11 Dec 2002
Time: 21:02:56 -0500
Remote Name: 66.114.133.71

Comments
Levi Hi
Is your last name Coley? I worked with a guy named Levi Coley from Mont. years ago. I din't interput it that way. I'm looking at a hunt in the Bob Marshall. I was just suprised to hear it called the firing line. The Gardner hunt is famous and I've seen pictures of the big bulls. So I always thought that was an option, but I guess not. I have only hunted in Wa. and Tex. so I,m looking forward to some out of state hunts. I would,nt mind asking you a whole lot of questions if you,re willing to share some information.
Ed C
elranchogobroko@pioneernet.net

Miller
01-15-2003, 01:28 PM
Being formerly from PA this type of thing comes up often. More often than not the person who puts the killing shot in the animal will claim it. Things have gotten out of hand to the point of weapons being pointed at human targets. The real only exception to this is if you are hunting with friends and the deliver the coup degraw. The philsophy in PA is use enough gun and shoot straight to avoid the issue. My personal opinion is thatit should be the initial shooters, but experience has shown me it's better to give up the game to hunt another day and avoid a nasty confrontation. /images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif

Randy
01-25-2003, 08:12 AM
What a great question. In Washington, he who delivers the killing shot is the owner, by law. Whether we like it or not part of being an ethical hunter means we follow all game regulations to the letter. If we don't, we become fodder for some dolt on the evening news or in some local liberal rag. This past fall one of my partners passed on a nice muley buck and took a smallish whitetail that had been hit the previous day and couldn't get out of its bed. A hard decision, but the right one. We have the responsibility to treat our quarry with dignity. He did. Put the little guy down and let the big guy run so we can chase him next year.