17 June 2005, 05:25
Lhook7Yes, definately. That same rule is used here in Texas, and I agree with it.
I feel that if you draw blood, you own it.
There must be evidence that you hit the animal. CHEERS
18 June 2005, 00:32
MacD37I think the rule is sound game management! I wish that was the rule everyplace! The one thing I'd like to add, however is, the blood and pay be only after a concentrated effort is made to follow up the wounded game, before calling it lost!
There two things that are utilized in Africa that I wish would be standard everywhere, especialy in Alaska. Buy a general hunting license, but only pay for tags(trophy fees) for individual animals when they are in the bag, or wounded and lost! This would work very well on hunts for things like Sheep, and Brown bear where a guide is mandatory for out of staters, and aliens. Like Africa, the guide makes the call, based on blood evidence! I think more folks would book Brown bear hunts if the daily fees were all that was risked on what is now a $12K bear hunt, kill or not!
18 June 2005, 00:48
DPhillipsquote:
Originally posted by MacD37:
There two things that are utilized in Africa that I wish would be standard everywhere, especialy in Alaska. Buy a general hunting license, but only pay for tags(trophy fees) for individual animals when they are in the bag, or wounded and lost! This would work very well on hunts for things like Sheep, and Brown bear where a guide is mandatory for out of staters, and aliens. Like Africa, the guide makes the call, based on blood evidence! I think more folks would book Brown bear hunts if the daily fees were all that was risked on what is now a $12K bear hunt, kill or not!
Of the 12K for a bear or sheep hunt in AK, the non-resident license is about $350 and the Bear tag is $650, sheep tag $550. So of the 12K, roughly 11K is the daily rate, which is roughly $750-1000 a day.
23 June 2005, 14:14
wimpiequote:
Originally posted by mrlexma:
Yes.
But what about when you know you hit and wounded an animal and the PH, who was observing through a 10 power binocular, swears you missed?
This has happened to me. There was no blood or hair, but I shot at a hartebeest facing me head on, and I knew I had hit him off center just as he bolted off to his right. I insisted--had to insist--on following up the animal.
No blood for 50 meters. Then, a speck here and there. After two and a half hours of tracking, our Maasai found the hartebeest and I finally killed him. To me, that was vindication, but even more, relief at dispatching an animal I had shot badly.
So, the corollary of this wound and pay rule is: It's not enough simply to wash your hands of the matter and pay the fee for a wounded animal. If you know, or even strongly suspect, that you have wounded an animal, you must insist on following him up, and follow him up, no matter what.
MR
I would love to see more hunters to show the same commitment you did.
Wimpie
23 June 2005, 15:00
chargerIMO : If the PH is going to be saying when to shoot,and at which animal,and I'm going to be charged for a hit weather its a kill or not. Thats fine. I expect we're going to do some serious lookin though. I dont expect the 2 days and nights straight through that I've spent looking for the odd north american animal. But it best be more than a quick glance..If not for my $ sake,the animals sake.
23 June 2005, 16:24
<mikeh416Rigby>I feel that charging for a wounded animal is fair. Another instance of charging for an animal enforced by some outfitters is if the shot goes high and a horn is shot off. The reasoning behind this is that the animal is no longer available as a trophy, and must be charged for. I agree with this as well.
