I just read a thread where someone said "last shot owns the elk", meaning the elk was hit, but the last person to shoot it is the one to tag it.

I have always believed that "first blood owns the animal". What do you guys go by?

I have always went by the frist blood rule. As long as the person making the first shot as a reasonable chance of recovery.

If the first shot is clearly a fatal one(IE the critter is going to run and drop dead shortly)

If the first shot is a bad one gut shot, wounded lightly and the critter could run a long time then the shot that puts its down for good.

Exsample a person double lungs a critter its in its death run. Just before it drops over another party shoots it. Well it would be the first persons critter as the critter had no chance of exscape.

The same shooter shoots a critter and wounds it where it could run for miles or be alive hrs later. The 2nd person shoots it and puts it down then its the 2nd person critter.

The 2nd person could with out feeling bad tag it and keep. Or if he wanted to he could give it to the first person. If he was so incline to.

In most states the animal isn't owned until one tags it. Then the person whos tag is on it owns it.

Iam not saying this is right but one could find a world record buck laying dead tag it before anybody else and you would own it. It would most likely piss the shooter off. And would not be very honest or nice. But from a leagl stand point it would be the taggers buck.

SBT - When I started to hunt several decades ago the unofficial rule was that the "owner" was the hunter who finished off the animal and reduced it to bag. Having been a hunting education program instructor now for many years I encourage everyone (new and seasoned hunters) to use ":The Rule Of First Blood. This rule says that the hunter to first draw blood AND produce a blood trail sufficient to be followed to the downed animal has ownership. This is true even if that first shot is not fatal and a second hunter's shot is.

Hope this helps. - EB

In Maryland the law is last shot owns the deer.

I lost a beautiful eight pointer that was dead on it feet but crossed a road and was shot by a hunter on the neighboring farm. If I was the other guy I'd have given the deer to the hunter who shot it first. The arguement was settled by the annual guide book which was clear about the issue. Still, I'd have given up the deer if I was the second shooter, and have done so since.

JPK

My friends and I go by first blood. Whoe ever hits the buck first ownes it. That has kept the peace in our hunting camp for years. Ron

I try to hunt where the possibility of another hunter shooting my animal is rare. I've hunted areas twice where this has been an issue. The first I was hunting around Westcliff, CO. I was hunting with my cousin and his family, his brother shot a cow elk and didn't kill her but broke her spine and the cow couldn't move. Before he got to the animal another hunter came up and shot the cow and claimed it. The brother didn't even bother arguing over it he just went on and shot another cow.

The second I was hunting around Craig/Meeker, CO this year and there was a lot of hunters in the area. After I sat around for a couple of hours on opening day and hadn't seen anything I decided to walk around. I couldn't go 100 to 200 yards without running into some hunter orange. Got back to camp that afternoon and I guess there had been some problems with a cow again, both hunters had shot it and both were trying to claim it. I don't know what was said but DOW settled it, they pulled both the hunters tags and hauled off the kill to be donated. I wuoldn't want my trip to end that way especially when an out of State tag cost over $200.

This topic keeps popping up all over the place, and ends up being a question of ethics/what is right/fair play, etc. versus what the legal definition is.

Game wardens don't like having to deal with these type situations, but from my limited experiences, in most states, whoever puts the animal down has the legal right to tag the animal.

It would be nice if whoever drew first blood had the legal claim to the animal, but in the example someone gave about what if it was a record class buck, turn that a 180 and what if the animal that was shot was a dink, shot by mistake. Then how many of the first blood drawers would want to claim that animal and end their hunt, or say "Oh that is okay, you keep it, it was going to get away from me." so that they didn't have to tag a dink.

Ethics are an individual set of choices. None of us as ethical hunters want to see a wounded animal be lost. But, I have been in enough hunting camps, and watched peoples ethics erode over a several day period as far as game harvesting was concerned.

It is like wondering how many animals that turned out to not be what the shooter thought they were shooting at, are left in the woods every year. JMO.

Here it's how puts it down for the last time. But I've always gone by the first killing shot. I once had a 8 pointer run up to me, I shot it, it went right down. After getting out of the tree, I was looking over the deer when another hunter wlaked up explaining that he had been trailing it. We both looked at the shots, his was the kiling shot, I helped him gut his deer.

This topic does resurface now and then. Not that I like it but when I was in the south, in the hunting clubs of north Alabama, the rule was, the hunter that downs the animal is the owner, regardless of 8 bleeding holes it may have had before. I think I'm starting to sound like a broken record, so I apologize, but the incident that stands out the most is my friend that lost a beautiful buck that he shot with his 243 that made it some distance and other hunters dropped it.

Me personally, I think whoever puts a killing shot on it is the rightful owner and should tag it. Shouldn't matter if it runs 1 yard or 200, it is going to die. This is why I hate the "hunting clubs" of the south so much. If your deer runs onto another club and another hunter shoots it, puts it down, it can turn into a heated confrontation. I know, I've seen them.

I too grew up in the South, the rule there is: He who puts it down tags it. That said; this comes from dove & quail hunting, where it is common for the target to take multiple hits. If the wounded game makes it to another hunter, it has avoided its original attack; if it eludes you it may very well end up being claimed by a scavenger (human or otherwise). If you shoot a buck and trail it until you find it being eaten by a bear, you best have a bear tag or be willing to walk away. Just keep in mind that hunting is a sport; and we should conduct ourselves as sportsmen and follow proper rules of sportsmanship and etiquette; the old “do unto others†thing. Be a responsible and proud HUNTER, not a scavenger. Stick together to uphold our sport.
Dave

Hutning w/ my buddies, first blood rule. Hunting w/ general public, last killing shot.

quote:

Originally posted by fredj338:
Hutning w/ my buddies, first blood rule. Hunting w/ general public, last killing shot.

Yes, I forgot to mention that. The original question didn't ask whether or not it was a party hunt or not. Good point.

I think if someone shoots an animal and the animal is a track able animal and if for some reason required a second shot, the original shooter shoud have that opportunity.

If someone shoot an animal, the second person shooting at it may of never had the opportunity at that animal so by rights the first person drawing blood should get the animal.

My buddy shot a deer and it was a lung shot, it ran by me, so I put a finishing shot on it and kept it in the field. That deer was my buddies, the only thing I did was stop us from having to track that deer in the thick woods.

To expand a little on the question, In addition to first blood takes the animal, when I hunt with friends, first sighting takes the animal. I'd be a little annoyed to see a nice buck, bull, or otherwise, mention just that, and see from the corner of my eye a rifle barrel swinging to. I'd never think about trying to take a game animal that someone else had seen and or shot first. Thats just greedy.

quote:

Originally posted by Scott King:
To expand a little on the question, In addition to first blood takes the animal, when I hunt with friends, first sighting takes the animal. I'd be a little annoyed to see a nice buck, bull, or otherwise, mention just that, and see from the corner of my eye a rifle barrel swinging to. I'd never think about trying to take a game animal that someone else had seen and or shot first. Thats just greedy.

This is more how it is for me too.

I was the poster that first mentioned it, In Wyoming, it is illegal to kill an animal for another, in other words last shot gets it. My wife's elk was down, but the head was up the G.W.'s ex wife finished it and she claimed the cow, some times the law sucks a little!!

P dog is spot on. First blood means a shotr which should be fatal on it's own, or at least allow a good chance of follow up and recovery. I don't think a nick through the hair constitues a valid claim. Hopefully it ends well between the parties involved. It's only an anaimal, and not worth the lifetime of regrets of losing a friendship, or getting into a legal challenge involving the dreaded LAWYERS! I should add that I have over the years finished someone elses business and never felt that I had a right to the animal, nor did I have the desire to claim it. If they hadn't shot first, the dominos wouldn't have fallen as they did.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:
...This is why I hate the "hunting clubs" of the south so much. If your deer runs onto another club and another hunter shoots it, puts it down, it can turn into a heated confrontation. I know, I've seen them.

Hey Doc, You seem to be implying this is never a problem up Nawth!

Perhaps it was a Club full of transplanted YANKEES, simply rude folks, or Rookie Hunters who think they will never get another kill.

I can't think of a single place I've ever Hunted where this was a problem anywhere in the Mason-Dixon area.

When I kill one, if someone else needs it, they can help themselves. If they need Antlers or Doe ears or Tails, they can have them, same for the meat. "Hep ya-sef!"
---

Must admit that I would not want someone to "try" to take a Deer from me. No need to be Rude or Stupid. But, if they shot at it, first, second or whatever, they are welcome to it.

As for who it really belongs to, no doubt it is the guy who put the "finishing shot" into the Deer. Too many errant shots that folks thought were right on the shoulder allow Deer to be lost. If it can make it to another Hunter with 2-legs shot out from under it, or the heart shot out, or the lungs reduced to mush, and if the Second Hunter put in the actual Killing Shot, it is just that - his kill.

Always plenty more Deer coming along, or to be kicked up, in a short while.

Here in Louisiana the Hunter's Safety instructors usually explain that the first man to shoot owns the game even if it goes onto someone else's property and they shoot it as well. Of course you have to get permission to retrieve the animal and that can get quite hairy at times.

I try to avoid hunting right on property lines unlike all of the dang poachers around our place that think their stands have to be inches from the property line so they can shoot on our land Our laws are pathetic here, Wildlife agents will not do anything to poachers and the local officials don't want to deal w/ it.

I agree w/ the others about the killing shot should own the animal. If someone hits them in the leg first and you heart shoot them second they clearly shouldn't get the animal.

Good Luck

Reloader

quote:

Originally posted by Hot Core:
Hey Doc, You seem to be implying this is never a problem up Nawth!

Oops. Sorry, I didn't mean it that way. I've never hunted in the north, per say. Only the midwest. I'll qualify my post. I grew up in north Alabama. Seems like hunting clubs were everywhere, and the only way to get into some decent hunting was either to join one or have private land. When I went to Iowa to go to school, and hunted there, and MO, there were no "hunting clubs." Not that I ran into anyway.

I'm sure this potential confrontation over a dead deer could happen anywhere, but my own experiences keep the bulk of my discussions to the south or midwest.

The one truly heated argument I saw was over a dinky 5 point that was a 1.5 year old little buck...a basket rack as they call it. A couple of the guys looked like "mountain men." They weren't wearing orange (illegal), have been caught tresspassing on leased lands which they did not pay, hunting anyway and dared one of our members to make him leave. They've been caught rifle hunting during BOWSEASON.

These aren't the kind of fellas you'd want to argue with IMO. Half a dozen mad rednecks with firearms in the north mountains of Alabama standing over a dead deer arguing over who gets it isn't exactly a comforting situation.

I can't believe this is ever a problem for AR members - heck everyone here uses at least a 375 H&H for deer, premium bullets going at least 3000 fps, makes a perfect shot, and always gets a Bang Flop result - right?

Brent

First time poster on this forum and I am not trying to hijack the thread. My posting has been done on the African Hunting forum (and not much of that). My ethics questions is when a wounded deer comes in your area and it would fill your tag. Shoot or don't shoot?

I have had it happen twice. The first time I heard a shot over the hill from my location and 5 minutes later several does came in with one bleeding from its rump. The doe was keeping up and did not show a limp. If it had not filled my tag I would have taken it out. (There were larger ones and always the hope for a buck) On this occaision I made the call it would live and let it walk. The other hunter claimed he shot and missed. I didn't correct him so as to not make him feel bad, after all I let it walk also.

The second time a deer came in with several others and its jaw was broker to where it wasn't grazing when the others were. I hadn't heard a shot but the wound looked fairly fresh. I did go ahead and harvest this doe which ended my hunt. No one ever owned up to making the first shot and I do not regret taking it. However, I would have appreciated the first shooter admitting it and would have preferred to continue my whitetail hunt.

No regrets but would a situation similar to this change how you thought about the first shot or the second shot especially if you had paid up for a tropy hunt? (this was not a trophy hunt)

In those situations I would have finished the animal off to keep it from suffering any longer.

For me, I was talking more about a fatally hit animal that happened to be running top speed, just wasn't dead yet, and it happened upon another hunter that simply put it down, regardless of whether or not it was about to collapse right there.

quote:

Originally posted by SBT:

I have always believed that "first blood owns the animal".

Me too, unless first blood is clearly non-lethal and the first shooter is far out of the picture (over the next ridge, etc.). But personally I would prefer to let the other guy have the animal and keep hunting, as I enjoy the hunt, not the packing out.

The thing that always bothers me, is the possibility, of someone taking a shot, and the animal not falling down immediately, thinking they missed and not even going to look for blood.

I know that someone is going to take exception to this statement, but in my 35+ years of hunting, the percentage of animals that I have killed, that fell dead on the spot, is probaly around only 10% of all the game I have killed.

I just feel that so many folks, probably more than any of us want to think about, figure they have missed completely if the animal does not drop on the spot. JMO.

My buddies and I always First blood owner/ General Public First Blood owner, depending on the shot placement.

Well, since it is always entertaining to me to ask nonhunters questions like this, just so they can respond to the principle aspect, here's what the ladies at work said:

They both agreed that if they put a killing shot on a deer, yet it still managed to run some distance, it is still theirs. One said, "I have no control over where that deer goes or how far it runs but if I put a killing shot on it, it's mine, I don't care if 10 other people shot it."

So, there's their opinion.

From a personal or ethical standpoint I agree with most here that whoever makes a lethal shot should be the one to claim the animal. But here in Montana whoever tags the critter first gets it regardless if they pulled a trigger or not. At least this used to be the rule unless it's changed recently.

quote:

Originally posted by Doc:
...These aren't the kind of fellas you'd want to argue with IMO. Half a dozen mad rednecks with firearms in the north mountains of Alabama standing over a dead deer arguing over who gets it isn't exactly a comforting situation.

Hey Doc, If you had expanded that to 80,000+ mad "drunk" rednecks ...arguing over anything at all, you would have described a favorite place I enjoy - a good ole Clemson ballgame!!!

Good hunting and clean 1-shot kills to all you folks.

Try going to all of the Alabama/Auburn games! Pure chaos.

The first blood rule does not make sense. In the real world possession is 9/10's of the law.

Either you have the deer or you don't have it.

Of course some detail might sway common sense one way or another. If hunters are only 40 yds apart and a deer is lung shot well then......

Now if some club or group goes by first blood then fine. Just don't expect everyone to abandon possession.

I got myself involved in a real tense situation that I would not do again. But now I am older and not so full of it.

I was watching a very open hardwood lot with some views out to 200 yds or so. I was near the top of a Vermont hill maybe 2500 feet up. Down below there was lots of land, a large hunting camp and miles below that the highway and farms.

A forkhorn buck came into view about 175 yds away walking slowly with a steady pace uphill. I was sitting and it was an easy shot for my 358. I hit it in the lungs and it went right down and stayed down.

I moved right along down to the fallen buck and it was still holding its head up but failing. I noticed a lot of blood on its haunch.

Then four hunters came up the hill right towards me. They were going about as fast as one could up the steep grade. They came upon the deer and me and went right over to it and said "thats the one" etc. At this point the deer had just died luckily for me.

I said that I had just shot it as it was walking along. The guys kind of surrounded me and there was a bad feeling in my heart.

One of the guys was a very big man not all that young but he was strong. He picked (my) deer up and lifted the bucks leg up till the whole deer was in the air, said "look, it's no good now" and then he threw it down on the ground.

What to do? I wanted the deer and felt it was mine. It had been shot broadside through the hams and was bleeding pretty bad but still right along when I shot it.

So I put my rifle down on the ground and took out my wallet and put my tag on it.

As soon as my tag went into the deers ear everyone relaxed just as if a bell had rung.

Thats the last time for a confrontation like that.

Just my opinion!
I think it is unfortunate that so many "sportsmen" are driven by possesion and trophy points. I appreciate that laws vary state to state, so the first blood or last blood rule can vary. That being the case, I can't imagine arguing or fighting over whos game it was. I guess I would consider it un gentlemanlly, or uncivilized to even be suspected of "stealing" much less really stealing another hunters game animal.

We do a lot of party hunting up here. (is legal)

Most of the time its first blood. But if the guys messes up the first shot and the deer is clearing getting away its the guy who puts it down.

Used to be a bigger problem when there where a lot less deer now we kill way more and give lots of them away.

The only time I could see it being trouble now is if it had a huge rack. Some thing over the 180 range other then that. We tag it and go on hunting.

For those hunters who worry about filling a tag by putting a crippled deer down in a mercy killing.

Several years ago I shot a buck that had both front legs broken by another hunter's bullet. Eventually, the deer would have died of infection, he'd stopped bleeding but was a pitiful sight. He'd probably been shot on a neighboring farm earlier that day. It was a pure mercy killing and I didn't want to tag the deer, neither did I want to see it go to waste.

I called the local Wildlife officer and he met me. I explained the situation and he hemmed and hawed and was reluctant to not make me use my one amd only buck tag. In the end, at my urging he took a look at the deer and then gave me a non hunting tag. I had expected him to take the deer and let me continue my hunt, but he told me it was mine if I wanted and that if he took it it would end up going to waste since he couldn't do anything with it til too late on this warm day.

In the end it was a win win and my good deed didn't get punished.

JPK

JPK,
Kudos to you for being responsible and putting the animal out of its misery. You've shown remarkable character, risking your hunt and reporting your actions. I'm glad it worked out well for you.
Dave

Where I hunt, it is who ever tags it, gets it.

Across the river is a hunting club, and they chase quite a few deer over to our side. We accidently harvested of few of theirs, and I imagine some of them have got a few of ours. Never had a problem. Did have one guy ask if he could claim his son's first buck (a little 4x) and we let him.

If I shoot a deer through the lungs or heart and it runs a little ways and I get there and some SOB is there trying to put a tag on it, it's not gonna be his day!!!

Several years ago we were hunting caribou 40 miles in the back country. We all had one tag and were looking forward to shooting some nice bulls. My ex hunting partner and one of his friends takes a walk up a hill above camp and all of sudden it sounds like world war 3, I counted 13 shots. A couple hours go by and here they come with his caribou. They had got into a herd and he opened up on them, shooting all 13 shots with his 338. Later that day I was above the spot where he shot his caribou and I saw a small lone caribou bull walking along but with a noticeable limp. I threw the bino's up and could see a blood spot on it's side, obvioulsy wounded by my ex partner. I wasn't sure what to do, I wanted a bigger bull but watching that caribou suffer like it was made my decision easy. I put it down with 1 shot from my 270 and my hunt was over. The poor thing had been gut shot and was very sick, i'm glad I put it down as it would have suffered for quite a while before dying. I mentioned what had happened to my friend but he denied hitting any other caribou but the one he took, but I knew better. We never hunted together after that happened.

You did a good thing, This all started with my wife hitting a cow elk, it was very sick, my wife was not in a position to kill it and finally another hunter in our group shot it, I was with the GW and I was in a position to kill it I asked him if I could put it down he said if you do I will give you a ticket, I think he is a prick. I don't like seeing a wounded animal, I understand the law but there is a gray area also.