Am I Just Being a Hard A _ _???

[sjvcon]

So am I just being a hard "A" by saying that if you shoot an animal but don't recover it, you should be done hunting? I've always thought that you should practice your craft and be able to take an animal out with one shot, or at least hit it well enough that you can trail it and put it down (and on your table).

 

Too many times I hear where hunters wound an animal, don't recover it (either because they don't look hard enough, look long enough, or didn't hit it well enough) and then go on hunting until they fill their tag. I don't like adding laws to the books ... I'd like to think we can be ethical enough to police ourselves. I think if you hit one and don't find it, enjoy the rest of your weekend TRYING TO FIND IT ... spend some time in the great outdoors ... but don't shoot at another animal (unless you want to Coyote hunt while you are looking).

 

So am I wrong? Am I just being overly tough on this type of situation? Thoughts?

[Snapshot]

Alot of hunters would just keep on hunting. Very few would police themselves, because there are no witnesses around.

 

If you hunt in Africa, you pay a trophy fee for the wounded animal, if it is recovered or not.

[Elkaddict]

Alot of hunters would just keep on hunting. Very few would police themselves, because there are no witnesses around.

 

If you hunt in Africa, you pay a trophy fee for the wounded animal, if it is recovered or not.

Mexican ranchers don't take kindly to having their deer wounded, most of the time its gonna cost you. Don't know how you would enforce it here.

[bonecollector]

It happened on my first day o my hunt this year. Young kid tells me " hey my uncle just shot a deer but its just wounded so if you see it take it" they looked for 30 min then left the area. Im sure they hunted the rest of the weekend.

 

 

[6ANut]

Totally agree wounded my elk on the 5th day and searched for the next two. I killed my elk that year but gods creatures got to enjoy it.

[Tines]

if you spend a significant amount of time in the field, it's bound to happen. I'm not excusing or condoning it but if you think all of the practice in the world is fool proof then you're mistaken. Welcome to the unfortunate reality of hunting.

 

I have a tremendous amount of respect for the animals I hunt. If I ever chose to continue hunting after I wounded an animal it would be because I felt that it wasn't a mortal hit. And its not because I have this crazy desire to just "draw some more blood". It would be because I have full confidence that given the hit, signs and resiliency of these animals, I can sleep well at night knowing it will survive.

 

If that sounds insensitive then you don't know me very well. I HATE wounded animals. In fact, I don't like blood trails. I like it when they fall in sight. But I'm realistic.

 

I shot a buck in 2005 with a rifle. Never found him. He wasn't mortally wounded. I had zero problems stepping into the field the next day looking for him or another buck worthy of my tag. I felt I did everything right in preparation and waiting for the right shot. Just didn't end the way I wanted it too. For the record, him and an archery buck in '99 (also not a mortal wound) are the only animals I've ever wounded and never recovered. In 18 big game seasons I'd say that's pretty good odds.

 

I don't take bad shots. That helps. I hunt as smart as I think I can and should. That helps (sometimes) haha!

 

 

 

 

[sjvcon]

Never said it didn't happen. But I will say that practice, patience and shot selection definitely limit the exposure. Also, a more than casual effort at trailing an animal that doesn't quickly fall should be made. Never had the occaision to have to make the choice, but the question is whether you SHOULD keep hunting after wounding an animal? I certainly never will...but guys I know do. Was just curious for consensus.

 

[Tines]

You're absolutely right that there are things in your control to "limit the exposure". I guess there's just not a black or white answer like the question was originally stated, IMO. But it's nice to know that there are hunters like yourself who has holds himself accountable regardless of a "law" or not. I'd share a camp with you!!

[CUZTAIL]

I saw way more of that then i wanted to see this year. You just hope those guys learn and get fustrated with their effort and choose to better themselves. unfortunatly, everything i saw this year came right down to 1 thing... extreme lack of PATIENCE!

[elkhunter]

This is funny, 99% of the time I would say yes but the weird does happen. My dad shot a buck at 250 yds with 180 grn from 300 wsm, bullet landed about 2 inch behind the shoulder and 5 inch below the spine, the buck rolled down the mtn and layer flat. After 10 minutes of watching him we confirmed he was dead. The buck got up shook his head and walked downhill! We were able to kill hil.

 

 

Upon opening him up, the shot did no damage to his lungs, very weird, we figured maybe he was breathing out when the bullet hit him? Making him miss the lungs? It was purely a flesh wound at that point.

 

It just depends sometimes, sometimes a hunter scouts very hard and gives a buck a haircut on a shot and sometimes a hunter shoots a buck in the gut and doesn't track the buck down.

 

Ur a hard a$$ if someone worked hard and tracked a buck for days, ur not a hard a$$ when someone shoots a buck in the gut and does not track them down

[CouesWhitetail]

I consider myself done for the season if I don't recover a wounded animal and I believe it was a mortal hit. It's only happened once and I searched for a couple days not finding the javelina I had arrowed, but I did not hunt another because I considered my tag used.

[muleskinner]

Sounds like a topic for archery hunters...I get highly irritated every year listening to guys tell about the animal they stick and never find. Every shot was supposedly a kill shot, and they just can't figger out why they couldn't find it. I know the unexpected happens with all hunters...but there is less margin for error when you're using a bow...please be as selective as possible before you sling an arrow ! Not referring to anyone on this forum, just some archery hunters here in my neck of the woods.

[Coach]

IMO, it's not an archery vs. rifle thing. I've seen it from both ends. Legally, there is very little to enforce tracking a badly hit animal. This is where ethics come into play. I thought I knew a little bit about tracking and following blood trails, until I met an old friend I'll just call Doug.

 

Doug taught me so much about following blood. For one, if you're not on your hands and knees, you aren't doing your job. I see a lot of guys walking around, looking for obvious blood...Sorry, but that doesn't cut it. Once you've hit an animal, the responsibility lies directly on you to do everything you can to find it. And the only way to do that is to get on your hands and knees, and work the point of the shot, to the jump tracks, to the last drop of blood.

 

I've worked a number of "bad hit" blood trails now, and none of them are any fun. But you owe it to the animal to track it as far as you can, realize that when it realizes that it is hurt, it's gonna go down hill and toward water. But that animal might just keep on walking so you might have to track it many miles.

[Snapshot]

Fortunately, it has been close to 30 years since I have wounded an animal and not recovered it. It's not because I am a great shot, but because I only shoot when I know I can make a good hit,and have enough room for a folllow up if neccessary.I gut shot a deer once, and saw how much it suffered before I was able to dispatch him. I vowed not to do that again. Most hunters have made bad shots. It happens. WHat a hunter does after an animal is shot defines the character of a hunter. I have seen people shoot, and when the animal doesn't fall down, they think they missed....not always the case.

[Coues 'n' Sheep]

I totally agree with you 100%!! We even have a 48 hour rule with clients... if they draw blood we spend the next 2 hunting days looking for that ONE animal dead or alive...