Your opinion: whose deer is it?
11-28-2005, 08:43 AM
#1
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location:
Posts: 6,357
Your opinion: whose deer is it?
I have a theoretical question to ask. I really don't think there is a right answer -- I'm more interested in hearing peoples's thoughts than their conclusions.
A buck, a big buck with a big rack, is shot but not mortally wounded on a piece of hunting ground by a first hunter. This first hunter commonly shoots, wounds, and fails to recover at least one deer a season. The first hunter tracks the buck about 1.5 miles following a spotty blood trail. The hunter spooks thebuck out of its bed once, and the buck is able to run up hill fairly quickly. The blood trail follows a path indicating the buck is checking its scrapes for does -- the buck is continuing to pursue mating opportunities. A secondhunter sees the buck the next day (24 hours after the first hunter wounded the buck), the buck is alert and moving ablely. The second hunter shoots and kills the buck. Whose buck is it?
Further information. The first hunter is the son of the man who leases the hunting ground for raising cattle. The second hunter was invited to hunt the hunting ground by the first hunter four years before, but now the second hunter has permission to hunt directly from the father of the first hunter -- the man who leases the hunting ground for raising cattle.
This is a little more than a theoretical question. It happened where I hunt deer this year. I had filled my two tags, but my son was still hunting and wanted to know if he shot that buck would it be his or not. He never saw the buck, so the question is moot, but a darn interesting question. It irritates me that this first hunter blasts away and wounds animals about every year that are not recovered. He never cleans his rifle (could cause inaccuracy). He rarely practices at the range before hunting (this year he shot 6 rounds to sight in and to practice) and there is no telling where his gun shoots. He most often shoots offhand, without using a rest of any kind.
A buck, a big buck with a big rack, is shot but not mortally wounded on a piece of hunting ground by a first hunter. This first hunter commonly shoots, wounds, and fails to recover at least one deer a season. The first hunter tracks the buck about 1.5 miles following a spotty blood trail. The hunter spooks thebuck out of its bed once, and the buck is able to run up hill fairly quickly. The blood trail follows a path indicating the buck is checking its scrapes for does -- the buck is continuing to pursue mating opportunities. A secondhunter sees the buck the next day (24 hours after the first hunter wounded the buck), the buck is alert and moving ablely. The second hunter shoots and kills the buck. Whose buck is it?
Further information. The first hunter is the son of the man who leases the hunting ground for raising cattle. The second hunter was invited to hunt the hunting ground by the first hunter four years before, but now the second hunter has permission to hunt directly from the father of the first hunter -- the man who leases the hunting ground for raising cattle.
This is a little more than a theoretical question. It happened where I hunt deer this year. I had filled my two tags, but my son was still hunting and wanted to know if he shot that buck would it be his or not. He never saw the buck, so the question is moot, but a darn interesting question. It irritates me that this first hunter blasts away and wounds animals about every year that are not recovered. He never cleans his rifle (could cause inaccuracy). He rarely practices at the range before hunting (this year he shot 6 rounds to sight in and to practice) and there is no telling where his gun shoots. He most often shoots offhand, without using a rest of any kind.
11-28-2005, 08:51 AM
#4
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Morgan County, IL
Posts: 1,073
RE: Your opinion: whose deer is it?
the general rule i go with is who makes first blood. But, we're talking a matter of 3-4 hours max, on the trail, not a day or two later.
Based on the amount of time in your story, and without going on for 3 pages, .. the deer belongs to hunter #2
Based on the amount of time in your story, and without going on for 3 pages, .. the deer belongs to hunter #2
11-28-2005, 08:57 AM
#7
Fork Horn
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Harford County, MD
Posts: 434
RE: Your opinion: whose deer is it?
I've had this happen once in the past and it was in agreement that the shot that was "fatal" was the one who took the deer. I guess it depends on the circumstances though. A buddy of ours shot a buck in the shoulder and the arrow was merely hanging from the skin. It came to my dad and I and my dad dbl lunged him and we found him the next day. At first our buddy tried to claim that it was his deer, but had my dad not placed the shot he did, the deer would have just had a really sore shoulder.
After reading the scenario though, I'd say its the 2nd hunters deer. Like I said, every situation would be different.
After reading the scenario though, I'd say its the 2nd hunters deer. Like I said, every situation would be different.
11-28-2005, 09:13 AM
#9
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Kountze, Texas
Posts: 5,385
RE: Your opinion: whose deer is it?
ORIGINAL: Alsatian
A buck, a big buck with a big rack, is shot but not mortally wounded on a piece of hunting ground by a first hunter. This first hunter commonly shoots, wounds, and fails to recover at least one deer a season. The first hunter tracks the buck about 1.5 miles following a spotty blood trail. The hunter spooks thebuck out of its bed once, and the buck is able to run up hill fairly quickly. The blood trail follows a path indicating the buck is checking its scrapes for does -- the buck is continuing to pursue mating opportunities. A secondhunter sees the buck the next day (24 hours after the first hunter wounded the buck), the buck is alert and moving ablely. The second hunter shoots and kills the buck. Whose buck is it?
A buck, a big buck with a big rack, is shot but not mortally wounded on a piece of hunting ground by a first hunter. This first hunter commonly shoots, wounds, and fails to recover at least one deer a season. The first hunter tracks the buck about 1.5 miles following a spotty blood trail. The hunter spooks thebuck out of its bed once, and the buck is able to run up hill fairly quickly. The blood trail follows a path indicating the buck is checking its scrapes for does -- the buck is continuing to pursue mating opportunities. A secondhunter sees the buck the next day (24 hours after the first hunter wounded the buck), the buck is alert and moving ablely. The second hunter shoots and kills the buck. Whose buck is it?
1.If the 1st hunter truly does "commonly shoot, wounds, and fails to recover at least one deer a season," that hunter seriously needs to work on his shooting skills.
2.If the buck was "continuing to pursue mating opportunities", then I have probably had razor cuts worse than he was hit.
You said that you don't really think there is a right answer. I will have to respectfully disagree. This is a pretty easy one to figure out. Of course the 1st hunter sounds like he might be just barely smart enough to think otherwise.
C. Davis
11-28-2005, 10:21 AM
#10
Giant Nontypical
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location:
Posts: 6,357
RE: Your opinion: whose deer is it?
It sounds like there is a concensus that the 2nd hunter claims the buck.
C. Davis:
Well, yes, I agree that there is a "right answer," but I wanted to encourage discussion and not hammer anyone who disagreed. I think the 1st hunter would indeed have been very pissed off if my son had shot and killed "his buck" the next day, even if the original shot proved out to be a pass through flesh wound that likely would heal over in time. This is partly becausethe 1st hunter characterizes this as a "monster buck" and this evidently means a lot to him. He says he wouldn't have stuck on the trail so tenaciously if it had been a smaller buck.
I also agree that the 1st hunter ought to get his act together. In the past I dismissed the misses and woundings as exceptions, but over four years a pattern has been established. This year he shot and knocked down a doe that stood back up, ran away, and was not recovered. The buck this thread is directed to was shot and dribbled blood over 1.5 miles or more until the trial was lost. I guess I'll just have to make a special trip up there -- 250 miles -- before season with the expressed purpose of getting this guy out to a rifle range. I think if he had to sit at a bench and deliberately squeeze off 20 rounds under the observation of a fellow hunter -- me -- he may have to acknowledge that his shooting needs improvement. Part of this exercise would preferably involve having him shoot groups off-hand and then other groups from a sitting position, to demonstrate the advantages of using a more stable shooting position than off-hand when possible. Maybe I should clean his rifle for him and show him what comes out of the rifle barrel when you do this!!!
C. Davis:
Well, yes, I agree that there is a "right answer," but I wanted to encourage discussion and not hammer anyone who disagreed. I think the 1st hunter would indeed have been very pissed off if my son had shot and killed "his buck" the next day, even if the original shot proved out to be a pass through flesh wound that likely would heal over in time. This is partly becausethe 1st hunter characterizes this as a "monster buck" and this evidently means a lot to him. He says he wouldn't have stuck on the trail so tenaciously if it had been a smaller buck.
I also agree that the 1st hunter ought to get his act together. In the past I dismissed the misses and woundings as exceptions, but over four years a pattern has been established. This year he shot and knocked down a doe that stood back up, ran away, and was not recovered. The buck this thread is directed to was shot and dribbled blood over 1.5 miles or more until the trial was lost. I guess I'll just have to make a special trip up there -- 250 miles -- before season with the expressed purpose of getting this guy out to a rifle range. I think if he had to sit at a bench and deliberately squeeze off 20 rounds under the observation of a fellow hunter -- me -- he may have to acknowledge that his shooting needs improvement. Part of this exercise would preferably involve having him shoot groups off-hand and then other groups from a sitting position, to demonstrate the advantages of using a more stable shooting position than off-hand when possible. Maybe I should clean his rifle for him and show him what comes out of the rifle barrel when you do this!!!
