No there is not a rubber stamp fix for sure. One thing is this rule needs to be disscussed with anyone you may be hunting with ahead of time that's for sure. I learned my lesson there. I have not hunted with him since then as he still believes that way and I do not. And yes it was rifle. I had a forward gut shot and a spine shot I don't think he would have gone very far, not to mention the fact I had to stop shooting for fear I would hit my own brother in law as I was panning with my scope so I thought better of it and did not take a 3rd shot. Which I could have done pretty easy if he would not have been in that area.

I hate to think about having to face that situation in real life.

On the lighter side, when I go bowhunting with any ofmy buddies (and this arrangement is just between us, not just any Joe Schmo)it's agreed that if one of us hits a deer, and the other guy has still has a shot at the same animal, he takes it down in an effort to recover the deer easier and sooner, but it still belongs to the first guy that drew blood regardless of the point of impactof either arrow.
If I was gun hunting with a buddy, we wouldn't be close enough to know if a deer belonged to the other guy or not, so this rule wouldn't apply, and we wouldn't want the additional loss of meat from a second shot unless the first hit was extremely poor anyway.

Thinking about the original question, I'd like to think that the 'killing shot' idea would decide the issue rather simply, but since all wounds to the major organs will kill, albeit at varying speeds, a 'killing shot' would be any other than a mere flesh wound to muscle, bone, and skin. I would guess that the vast majority of disputes would involve both hunters making 'killingshots' on the same deer, and the arguement woul dbe more about who made thekilling shot that would result in the quickest death.

Even if both hunters wanted to be fair, therewould stillbe grey areas determining who hit it where,whether the first hunter's shot would have killed it, and whether the first hunter would have been able to recover the animal with proper waiting period, tracking skill, and without interferance from the second hunter.

All good reasons to hunt as close to alone as possible unless you're hunting as part of a team or with buddy with whom you have an understanding.

I'm not sure if it's the law or simply an entrenched custom here in PA but any hunter will tell you the last shot into the deer while it's on its feet is the rightful owner.

I dont happen to agree. I've given up two different rifle shot deer after seeing that the shot before was fatal AND that the previous hunter was following up.

I had a bowhunting situation where I hit a bit far back and got one lung, liver and guts. Signs of all three were at the hit site so we backed off and came back three hours later. We tracked the deer in snow and the tracks shoed that was bleeding heavily and fell down several times.She made it about 300 yards onto another property and fell in front of another bowhunter. He got down out of his tree and walked up and shot it on the ground. When we gotthere, he got real nervous and told us he had shot it on its' feet but the evidence in the snow definitely said otherwise. rather than get into an arguementthat no one would win, I walked away.

the deer last year i got was shot across its bottom and its gut were dragging on the floor, i than killed him and got to keep him. i feel like this can easily happen again since i hunt with 5-7 people on a 1 square mile peice of property.

Circumstances will play a role I would think. SBGobblers about summed it up for me. If the other guy made a good enough shot to have a good blood trail and had the ability to trail it to me I would probably let him have it if he could explain why he was on my side of the fence.

This happened to a buddy of mine 2 years ago on alottery hunt in MN.He hit a 13pt 160" dandy, watched it lay down, left it for 20 min got down walked over to where he seen it lay down and followed the blood trail to a another hunter that said he hit with the killing shot.(1st hit liver pass thourgh, 2nd neck 2" pen.) niether would give away ownership. Got DNR envolved they back trailed to buddys stand, had a little confrence between themselves and explained their reasoning on why they gave it to my buddy.

Most states have pretty set rules.

In CT and NY, both states follow the Bowhunting mandate, "the first lethal shot". On that premise, what percentage of deer that are hit with a lethal shot are actually shot again, while bowhunting? Michigan and NY calculated some rough percentages when they initiated the NBEF program. Reports from states in the 1960's & 70's indicated that less than 1% of deer harvested were ever shot twice, and even today I would bet the percentage is still 1-2%.

For gun, I believe all states stand by the "killing shot", i.e. the shot that drops the animal. I know that is the law in CT and NY.

Although the DEC/DEP/DNR typically do not see many squabbles with bowhunters, gunhunting problems of this nature are common. If you want to legally claim the deer, you had better put it down. Head/neck shots in certain parts of the country are popular for just that reason, as it's either a clean miss or a dead deer.

first lethal shot, but whos to say whats lethal? especially with a big buck on the ground. hiopefully this never happens to me, because if i shot the deer and hit it, i would be heartbroken if someone else claimed it

It depends where the deer was hit at on the shots. If the first person shot it and it was a killing shot he deserves it. But if it wasn't and the second person kills it then they should get it.

If you couldn't tell the deer had already been shot, then you take the person that had the best shot on it. If both the shots had been killing shots, the person who shot it first should be the one who get's it.