Nick87
Well-known member
Idk, I think the ones who take those shots taken em regardless and those who don't..don't.
Podcast on wounding
- Thread starter Big Fin
- Start date
3855WIN
Well-known member
brocksw
Well-known member
North Dakota started allowing tracking dogs last session. They compiled their information last month.
www.facebook.com
ND Tracking Dog Group
ND Tracking Dog Group. 1,428 likes · 1 talking about this. This page is dedicated to the recovery of mortally wounded big game. A bill was introduced this legislative session to allow the use of...
www.facebook.com
^^^^^
Good to see "sciency" numbers on tracking dogs. The youth mentoring program I work with mentoring has added dogs on call or on the property for the youth antlerless hunts the last two years. I've watched dogs work a shot deer and they'be gone three for three recovery. Two already expired, one needed a coup de grace and most likely wouldn't have been recovered except for the dog.
Good to see "sciency" numbers on tracking dogs. The youth mentoring program I work with mentoring has added dogs on call or on the property for the youth antlerless hunts the last two years. I've watched dogs work a shot deer and they'be gone three for three recovery. Two already expired, one needed a coup de grace and most likely wouldn't have been recovered except for the dog.
3855WIN
Well-known member
And Gage's number of recoveries is growing. Now 6 years old, he has found almost 500 deer.
"He's going to have about 470 lifetime recoveries so far — something like that," Walters said. "I'm at 101 for the year right now. I'll probably be at 110 to 125 by the end of the season."
"He's going to have about 470 lifetime recoveries so far — something like that," Walters said. "I'm at 101 for the year right now. I'll probably be at 110 to 125 by the end of the season."
Deer-tracking dog recovers hundreds of trophies for Mississippi hunters
The Chocolate lab has recovered more than 100 just this season. Here's how he does it.
www.clarionledger.com
OntarioHunter
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2020
- Messages
- 5,881
Must be some shitty shots down in Mississippi.And Gage's number of recoveries is growing. Now 6 years old, he has found almost 500 deer.
"He's going to have about 470 lifetime recoveries so far — something like that," Walters said. "I'm at 101 for the year right now. I'll probably be at 110 to 125 by the end of the season."
Deer-tracking dog recovers hundreds of trophies for Mississippi hunters
The Chocolate lab has recovered more than 100 just this season. Here's how he does it.www.clarionledger.com
"In a nutshell, the statewide bag limit is four antlered bucks and 10 antlerless deer," said William McKinley, Deer Program coordinator for the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks.
Or...y'know...they shoot at a lot of deer, period.
Nick87
Well-known member
Not every body can kill two in one shot...on accident.
Six by five
Member
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2020
- Messages
- 34
I like the idea as well.
1) A guy that wounds an animal shooting long distance or taking a risky shot with a bow is more likely to do that again, maybe multiple times on the same hunt.
2) The hunter still has the opportunity to pursue the wounded animal.
3855WIN
Well-known member
Heavy cover
That is way higher than I thought it would be.
Two factors likely at play. Dog hunters shooting at deer running full bore with buckshot and extraordinarily heavy vegetation. Take a look at what is pretty common for vegetation in MS.
nastynate
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2021
- Messages
- 387
@Big Fin I enjoyed the podcast. It's an issue I struggle with in particular as a bird hunter.... I'm afraid there are lots of birds that fly off with pellets in them (or crumple right out in front of you but seemingly vanish). Good dogs, tracking diligence, and careful shot selection help but the nature of shotgunning at flying game is one where misses and bad hits are a part of the deal, no matter how much you practice and understand your limitations. Not a whole lot of research out there on the topic, either... I've looked.
sclancy27
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2022
- Messages
- 493
I would say bird wounding (at least most ducks and upland birds) isn't nearly as big of an issue as big game animals for 2 reasons. First, fecundity of birds is really high, they will have clutches of 10-12 or more depending on the species. Thus, replacement can be high. Second, annual mortality of game birds can be as high as 90% (partridge). Given both those scenarios wounding a couple birds, as long as you give an honest go of finding them usually wouldn't have the same level effect as wounding a couple elk. I say usually cause if you wounded a couple sage grouse or himalayan snow @#)(# densities may be low enough where it could make a difference. That's just my opinion tho.
nastynate
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2021
- Messages
- 387
I agree with what your saying w/ respect to how it might effect the population. Weather and habitat related policy have way bigger effects on bird populations than hunting and presumably wounding loss for most species.
I was more coming from the perspective that it sucks to wound animals, and I suspect it happens more with shotgunning flying birds than other types of hunting. And then there are the hunting public relations issues related to wounding, which I think apply as well.
sclancy27
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2022
- Messages
- 493
Oh, it for sure happens more with birds, as evidenced by how many crippled geese we shoot on the river every year. I do my best not to, but I cripple or drop birds every year that I don't find. We run several dogs, so our loss rates are actually really low, but it still happens.
Beesting
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2022
- Messages
- 21
You see way to much of this. Guys shooting long distances like its no big deal. What they don't show you is how many animals the wound.
Khunter
Well-known member
Question:
Since I posted here on HT the plain truth about having wounded and lost a moose in 2022, despite using two diff tracking dogs on two days and 3+ days trying to find the critter. And then continued the hunt versus choosing to punch the tag. No reason to doubt the moose died, seeing the initial blood, just flat out could not find it.
I definitely received some negative reactions from a few folks, some were outright jerks and just throwing barbs in the hunt thread and via PM. Some merely stated their uninvited view that they would punch a tag if wounded an animal and failed to find it--I have no problem with that as we all make different and equally valid decisions. Not sure if it was because the animal in question was a Big 3 (Moose) that the knee jerk, (pun intended for a couple clowns) reaction and trolling of me that ensued on unrelated threads and even on other hunt forums, or if they would have acted out similarly if it was a deer etc instead of a big 3 critter. One clown trolled me here AND on two other forums cuz he just had to make sure the world knew about the wounding. Do not know the guy and never interacted with him other than his being a troll on this topic.
What are folks thoughts, when you are sharing a hunt story here, on fessing up or not and why, about a wounding and loss and continuing to hunt.
1) Do you support telling it like it is, whatever it is, as long as it was legal? If you lost a wounded animal and continued hunting don't shade the truth and go ahead and own it publicly?
2) Do you share fairly detailed hunt narratives on HT? I think that matters as a grouping factor for responses to the below. Frankly a lot less interested in response to the below from folks who never 'put themselves out there' but instead merely comment on or judge those who do step up to share hunt stories but avoid facing the same scrutiny.
3) Do you support the notion the wounding should not be mentioned at all online and in essence better to shade the truth of how the hunt actually transpired? Basically write up the full hunt and leave out the wounding and loss?
4) Do you think honest accounting on a hunt forum of a wounding loss, genuine effort to retrieve and then continued hunting the tag afterward actually harms hunting and is justification for shading the truth or leaving out that detail?
Personally, my inclination is to continue sharing a daily diary of hunt when I want, the way I want, and whatever happens ends up as part of the story. To me hard lessons learned and anguish experienced during a hunt are just part of it. Some hunts go like clockwork and some get more sideways than we would hope for. In retrospect I wonder if I had written up my moose hunt only after the hunt ended what I would have said about the wounding loss. Believe I would have discussed, but it is a painful memory from the hunt even today, so who can really say.
Earnest perspectives appreciated. Tough question because it deos kinda ask 'How would or have you handled it previously.'
Since I posted here on HT the plain truth about having wounded and lost a moose in 2022, despite using two diff tracking dogs on two days and 3+ days trying to find the critter. And then continued the hunt versus choosing to punch the tag. No reason to doubt the moose died, seeing the initial blood, just flat out could not find it.
I definitely received some negative reactions from a few folks, some were outright jerks and just throwing barbs in the hunt thread and via PM. Some merely stated their uninvited view that they would punch a tag if wounded an animal and failed to find it--I have no problem with that as we all make different and equally valid decisions. Not sure if it was because the animal in question was a Big 3 (Moose) that the knee jerk, (pun intended for a couple clowns) reaction and trolling of me that ensued on unrelated threads and even on other hunt forums, or if they would have acted out similarly if it was a deer etc instead of a big 3 critter. One clown trolled me here AND on two other forums cuz he just had to make sure the world knew about the wounding. Do not know the guy and never interacted with him other than his being a troll on this topic.
What are folks thoughts, when you are sharing a hunt story here, on fessing up or not and why, about a wounding and loss and continuing to hunt.
1) Do you support telling it like it is, whatever it is, as long as it was legal? If you lost a wounded animal and continued hunting don't shade the truth and go ahead and own it publicly?
2) Do you share fairly detailed hunt narratives on HT? I think that matters as a grouping factor for responses to the below. Frankly a lot less interested in response to the below from folks who never 'put themselves out there' but instead merely comment on or judge those who do step up to share hunt stories but avoid facing the same scrutiny.
3) Do you support the notion the wounding should not be mentioned at all online and in essence better to shade the truth of how the hunt actually transpired? Basically write up the full hunt and leave out the wounding and loss?
4) Do you think honest accounting on a hunt forum of a wounding loss, genuine effort to retrieve and then continued hunting the tag afterward actually harms hunting and is justification for shading the truth or leaving out that detail?
Personally, my inclination is to continue sharing a daily diary of hunt when I want, the way I want, and whatever happens ends up as part of the story. To me hard lessons learned and anguish experienced during a hunt are just part of it. Some hunts go like clockwork and some get more sideways than we would hope for. In retrospect I wonder if I had written up my moose hunt only after the hunt ended what I would have said about the wounding loss. Believe I would have discussed, but it is a painful memory from the hunt even today, so who can really say.
Earnest perspectives appreciated. Tough question because it deos kinda ask 'How would or have you handled it previously.'
Last edited:
BuzzH
Well-known member
I've wanted to comment on your hunt and you seem to want people to...so...
Here's what I think.
1. I do believe you put in a solid effort to recover the moose, I don't think anyone would say otherwise and it would be unfair to say you didn't.
2. I believe you aren't willing to accept the responsibility and possible outcome that you self imposed on yourself to hunt a large animal with a bow. You had a choice to use other weapons that are much less likely to have an unfavorable outcome. I have no problem with people wanting more of a challenge by limiting their weapon type, I do have a problem with not accepting ALL the responsibility that comes with that limitation. Part of that should be a requirement that when you draw blood, its done whether you find that animal or not.
3. I do believe you didn't put any thought into how you shooting 2 animals likely meant someone else with the tag didn't get to shoot 1. If you did, I can't recall you ever mentioning that. IMO, that needs to be a consideration, how your actions impact other hunters with that same tag.
4. I'm not sure why the need to shoot another, you weren't going to starve to death or even go without moose meat since you had a second tag in CO for moose.
Finally, I'm not condemning your for shooting 2 as its not illegal (although in my mind should be), and its a personal decision.
What it has reinforced for me, is that I will do everything in my power to NEVER allow an archery only tag to be issued in Wyoming for a big-5 species or really for any other species either (Type 9 elk for example). If the average bowhunter is just going to continue to keep shooting enough animals until they actually find one, well, I'm inclined to not support that non-sense via archery specific tags.
Hunting with a primitive weapon should have consequences for the hunter, because it clearly has consequences for the wildlife and other hunters.
Here's what I think.
1. I do believe you put in a solid effort to recover the moose, I don't think anyone would say otherwise and it would be unfair to say you didn't.
2. I believe you aren't willing to accept the responsibility and possible outcome that you self imposed on yourself to hunt a large animal with a bow. You had a choice to use other weapons that are much less likely to have an unfavorable outcome. I have no problem with people wanting more of a challenge by limiting their weapon type, I do have a problem with not accepting ALL the responsibility that comes with that limitation. Part of that should be a requirement that when you draw blood, its done whether you find that animal or not.
3. I do believe you didn't put any thought into how you shooting 2 animals likely meant someone else with the tag didn't get to shoot 1. If you did, I can't recall you ever mentioning that. IMO, that needs to be a consideration, how your actions impact other hunters with that same tag.
4. I'm not sure why the need to shoot another, you weren't going to starve to death or even go without moose meat since you had a second tag in CO for moose.
Finally, I'm not condemning your for shooting 2 as its not illegal (although in my mind should be), and its a personal decision.
What it has reinforced for me, is that I will do everything in my power to NEVER allow an archery only tag to be issued in Wyoming for a big-5 species or really for any other species either (Type 9 elk for example). If the average bowhunter is just going to continue to keep shooting enough animals until they actually find one, well, I'm inclined to not support that non-sense via archery specific tags.
Hunting with a primitive weapon should have consequences for the hunter, because it clearly has consequences for the wildlife and other hunters.
Last edited:
If you don’t think this is happening with high powered rifles I’m not sure what to say. I’ve witnessed more unethical long range shooting with rifles than I care to remember. Equally as bad as wounding with archery. It falls on the hunter not on the weapon used.
