Who gets it?
 

Just wanted to hear your thoughts.

A nine point buck runs by a father and son. They shoot at it. They hit it. Its mortally wounded. But jumps the fence onto private property. The land owner on the private property sees the deer. Its wounded. So he " finishes it off." The father and son track the deer over the fence onto private property (which in Wisconsin you do need to have permission to enter anyone's land) and find the landowner over the deer and claiming it. Who's deer is it?

Now the points of law in Wisconsin is clear. You have to have permission from the landowner to enter their property. The father and son did not. So technically, they violated the law. But how do you ask permission when the landowner is not home. He's out hunting.

Next point, the landowner saw that the deer was mortally wounded. But did put the "finishing off" shot into the deer. And by legal right, since its his land, has the right to claim the deer.

Here is how they settled the dispute. They flipped a coin. The son called heads, it landed tails. The landowner got the deer. Is this the right way to settle this or was someone wrong?

I'd say that that scenario, worked out better than 99.9% of any similar scenarios.

In my state, its also illegal to trespass, its also illegal to tag a deer you didn't legally kill. In this case, the first shooters had no claim, as the landowner legally killed the deer.

Here's how it works on OUR property. Someone shoots and wounds a deer severely, it comes on to our property and I dispatch it. If the hunter who originally shot the deer does come by tracking it, I'd give him his deer. I just merely stopped it from running any further or worse.

In the case you presented, I'd have given the deer to the youngster.

(Michigan thoughts).... Legally, it's the landowner's deer. He shot it dead on his own private property. Even if the landowner lied and fired another shot into an already dead deer, the pair of hunters have no bargaining rights. Owner has the right to chase them off his property, provided Private Property / Keep Out signs are posted.

Any "tracking-retrieval" agreement with landowner by original pair of shooters, has to OK'd by the landowner.

Even if the landowner didn't have to finish off the deer it was his to keep.

Flipping the coin was a generous offer. Hunters were lucky to not get a trespassing fine.

This is why I never hunt near private property if possible.

Although Triple Se7en is exactly correct with regard to the laws here in Michigan, it still does not pass the smell test to me personally. If my 3 year old son ran onto your property are going to keep him too? How about my dog? Again, just does not seem right to take something without working for it.

I have seen people keep deer, not let hunter's track, etc... I have even heard the first hand account of a landowner who allowed the the hunter to track the deer on his land. He even went to help, but the landowner claimed the dead deer when he saw it was trophy caliber.

On my land, I would prefer to have people ask to track, simply so I know they are there and their intentions. I do not want random people walking through my backyard only to use the excuse they are tracking a deer. I have helped people on my land. I would have given the deer to first blood. In Southern Michigan deer are "rats with antlers", they are everywhere. Not worth ruining a friendship over or worse. This is why I talk to all my neighbors prior to the season and have great relationships with all of them.

I'd give the kid the deer, assuming it's a kid and not a young adult. Otherwise, that's my meat that I killed on my land.

Nope, nobody was wrong. The land owner was not bound to even do a coin toss. But, either way both parties agreed to the coin toss and the man won. Better luck next time.

in this rare circumstance i would say it's certainly up to the landowner to make the final call.
i'm a big advocate for getting permission and respecting other peoples property as far as hunting is concerned but this situation definitely is an awkward one.
while it may rightfully be his to keep being it's his land, the landowner kind of took advantage of another hunters misfortune. i guess a lot depends on what extent the hunters went to in trying to obtain permission or if they just walked up to the house and with nobody home helped themselves.

Pretty silly. The dog and son are yours. The deer belongs to the state.

I would say the landowner was more accomodating than he had to be by agreeing to flip a coin. Even so, with a kid involved I would have conceded the buck to the young hunter and congratulated him and helped him with the recovery from my land. But that is just me.

By rights, the buck was the landowner's and he did give the kid a shot. Kid just got beat in the coin toss. Sometimes a boy needs to take it like a man to learn how to be one.