I just read an article about a fellow Hunting Mule Deer and he Killed two very large ones. Here are the quotes:

Hunt 1. With the sun directly in our eyes, D(the Guide) said, "Shoot, shoot," while pointing almost directly into the sun. I(the Hunter) couldn't see a thing in the shadows of the low hills.

Once again D said, "Shoot." Panning the hillside some 200yds away through the 6x scope, I noticed several deer, all does, and one outsized animal, but couldn't make out any horns. D was insistent. So, knowing the larger animal was a buck, if for no other reason than it was much larger than the other deer(???????), I looked for antlers. With some effort, I could barely make out some measure of horns against the backdrop of mesquite and pulled the trigger.

Blah, blah, blah...
-----

Hunt 2. It started raining. ...Blah, blah, blah... I was jolted back to reality when F(the 2nd Guide) said, "Shoot." I looked in the direction he indicated but saw nothing. He said, "Shoot, shoot." Looking more to the left, I saw a large deer, with another buck to the left; although at 120 or so yards, the rain and wet brush made it difficult to make out the horns against the backdrop of brown/green brush and cacti.

Blah, blah... I looked through the scope. It was a good buck, but the horns were masked by the wet palo verde. I pulled the rifle over just a bit, centered the crosshairs on the chest, just behind the shoulder(????How in the world is that possible?????), and launched the ...Bullet... blah, blah, blah.

Question:
Who deserves the credit for the Kills?

Choices:
1. The Guides
2. The Hunter
3. The guides and the Hunter
4. Other(???)

 

Obama.

Sounds like luck to me, but who really cares about 'credit'. I did have a like situation this year, when I thought I shot a nice doe at dusk. When I walked up to it, I found it had a 6 point rack that I never saw.

I'd tend to say that the "hunter" in question should not have pulled the trigger in either scenario. He apparently wasn't 100% sure of his target, and thus couldn't be sure what was behind it. Isn't that gun safety 101?
"Sorry your husband is dead, but the guide told me to shoot" isn't a valid excuse.

Why would some one even put such an article in a magazine? Or in print.


I had to vote "other" blind ass luck!

I'd credit each with one half of a kill.

That's why you pay those guides the big dollars. If you ain't gonna do what they tell you, you might as well be on a DIY.

If I paid good money for a Guide and he was yelling "shoot, shoot, shoot" I would kick his ass.
I'm no guide but have helped many times with someones kill. My method is never yell "shoot, shoot, shoot" I usually subscribe to the calm description of where the animal is have the shooter glass it with bino's, locate it in the scope and we discuss whether or not it is what they are looking for. If they aren't seeing the horns just right a vivid description of what I'm seeing usually helps them decide if they are going to be pleased with what they are shooting. If there isn't time to assess it and its getting away well then so be it we missed an opportunity, better that than someone having regrets about what they shot.
Just my opinion, other people other places some will act and react differently.

quote:

Originally posted by daniel77:
I'd tend to say that the "hunter" in question should not have pulled the trigger in either scenario. He apparently wasn't 100% sure of his target, and thus couldn't be sure what was behind it. Isn't that gun safety 101?
"Sorry your husband is dead, but the guide told me to shoot" isn't a valid excuse.

+1

quote:

If I paid good money for a Guide and he was yelling "shoot, shoot, shoot" I would kick his ass.

I have to agree with Snellstrom. I pay the guide for his knowledge, guidance and ability to put me on and judge game. The decision of whether or not I shoot and if it is truely the animal I want is totally mine. But then, all of that is discussed up front so there is no question. If he tells me to shoot, I would ignore him, if he tells me there is a big (whatever) out there that he thinks I will be very happy with, then I consider it.

Interesting that we have 337 Views this morning and 14 Poll responses.

Had no idea it would be that difficult of a question for the majority of the Board.

I'm a literal guy, which never served me well on essay questions back in 9th grade English class. The way I see it, he who shoots the animal is getting credit for killing it because, well, his bullet killed the animal. This is why I have a problem with a guide shooting at an animal after the hunter shoots it because, in my eyes, if the guide shoots and his bullet kills the animal then he gets credit for the kill because his bullet literally killed the animal. Only if the animal is charging do I want the guide to join in the shooting.

Now, as to who gets credit for finding the animal, that's going to whoever found the animal, so the guide in the above scenario. I guess under my logic though the technical "hunter" is the guide and the hunter is really just the Grim Reaper along for the hike.

In the situation described the guy was only not 100% sure of the antlers. There was no safety issue in the situation at the top of the thread.

Maybe so many people didn't respond because in my opinion, please take no offense, this was a lame poll. I know its Feb. and there is nothing much going on.

Let's say its you best friend and hunting buddy and he spots the animal. He's already filled his tag and is going along for a good time. He spots the deer first and you can't make out the antlers for whatever reason. He says "shoot, you stupid bastard."(best friend hunting buddies can do this) You shoot, you kill a nice buck. Would this be worthy of a poll as to "Who deserves the credit for the Kills?" I hope not.

Again, just my opinion.

The only reason I chimed in was the possible "safety" issue of 100% sure of target. Just because one killed a spike instead of the b/c buck right next to it because you couldn't make out the antlers is depressing, not unsafe.

Hang in there fellow hunters, turkey season will be here in a month.

This reminds me of a billboard that used to be in town. It read, "what part of THOU SHALT NOT, don't you understand".

You should not shoot if you are not 100% sure of your target. It matters not if someone else claims to be sure, the trigger puller is the final word and only one responsible if things go wrong. Safety isn't the only reason for this. I have two good examples.

One: The state record buck for LA was killed in the Tensas NWR thirty miles south of where I grew up. It was a 34 point freak. He was a very large bodied deer for our area and had massive horns with essentially softball sized masses above the brow tines and points going off in all directions. The guy who shot this truly massive racked buck thought it was a doe. Would you like to hunt in the same woods as that moron? I don't want to kill any animal bad enough to get shot by some spray and pray asshole.

Two: A very good buddy of mine and I were on his club where he needed to kill a doe that day, or they would get fined. We eased up on 8-10 deer about 50-70 yds away, and I had the binos, he had the gun. Killing a nubbin buck on this club was grounds for a major fine as well, so we wanted to be sure. I glassed and told him to take the largest deer on the left. From where he was standing, in front of me, there were two separate groups of deer and he shot the left deer of the wrong group too quickly for me to stop him. This deer was, wait for it, a nubbin buck, or a $500 ooops depending on your position.

The worst thing that happens if you are mature enough to admit that you aren't sure and don't take the shot is that you don't kill that deer, for better or worse, right at that time. Worse things can happen when you pull the trigger without knowing all you should first.

"Don't shoot unless you are 100% sure of your target." -Gun Handling 101.

Slim, I like your way with words. You cut right to the heart of it.

quote:

Originally posted by slim buttes:
Maybe so many people didn't respond because in my opinion, please take no offense, this was a lame poll. ...

Hey Slim, No offense at all. What would have made the Poll better?
-----

Hey Daniel, Interesting comments which fit the other situations very well.
-----

And an excellent take from all those who have responded. I read stuff like this and really wonder where all the Ethics that used to be in the Gun Rags went.

By the way, the Hunter was the " Editor " of Successful Hunter ", dave scovill, which may explain "WHY?" it got into the Rag.

Hot Core wrote:

quote:

Interesting that we have 337 Views this morning and 14 Poll responses. Had no idea it would be that difficult of a question for the majority of the Board

Your question doesn't generate the response you want, but instead of accepting that it may indeed be yet another pointless poll, you take a cheap shot at the forum members. How childish...

Then again, no one would have expected any better -- or more mature -- behavior from you anyway.

I found the whole thing kind of ignorant. The nimrod shouldn't have shot, but probably allowed the fool to pressure him into it.

The guide doesn't give a damn what the maybe-buck is like. He wants blood on the ground and your trophy fee secured. If you shot, you deserved to have been taken for a ride.

When I pay my fee for a guided hunt, everybody associated with it works for me, not the other way around, and they better damn well act like it.

It's my call whether I take the shot or not, and I couldn't care less whether the guide or outfitter get frustrated. If they can't get me a good shot opportunity on a quality trophy, they haven't done their job.

Daniel

Being 100% sure your target is a deer, and being 100% sure your target (deer) is a doe, spike, or b/c buck is different. Nothing to do with the original poll/situation.

How many shots did the guy use to kill the LA record? Maybe the"34 point freak" was by a tree and the hunter thought "branches", because there is no way there is a 34 point freak standing right there. Hardly qualifies a person as a moron. Just a lucky SOB.

Hot Core I don't know the poll could have been better. Thanks for not taking offense to my comment. None was intended.

Slim, interpretations vary. When I hear of someone taking a coached shot that they aren't sure of red flags go up. I wish that was the case for more people.

You can go back and reread the OP. He states in the first one, simply that the deer were in the low foothills and the sun was in his eyes. It doesn't state that the deer was on top of one of those hills or not, but certainly this is not the safest situation in which to take a shot?
Second scenario, the hunter is day dreaming, or asleep, and upon waking quickly "launches a bullet" at a deer's chest, which he seems to think is behind the deer's shoulder. Again, red flags pop up for me. People are killed every year by well meaning hunters taking seemingly innocent shots. I knew a man who was killed on his own farm by an out of towner who mistook his belt buckle for the white patch of a deers throat. To make matters worse, the out of towner then got the land owners son to help him load up his "deer" on the 4-wheeler. He wasn't 100% sure of his target and another paid the price.

Don't shoot unless you are 100% sure of your target!!!!! 100% is not the same as 90%!!!!! -Again, Gun SAFETY 101 and fifth grade math

If I caught a twelve year old doing what this Nat'l Gun Mag editor did, I'd ground him. It really is a shame that more people don't see red flags all over this. This is exactly how accidents with firearms occur. Kinda like when Bubba says "hey ya'll watch this."


100% means 100% nothing else is acceptable.

I'm not trying to start a contest with you, but it irks me that someone who should be an example is in fact a bad one. I believe I've made my point and I'm done.

And as far as I'm concerned, anyone who kills a monster buck thinking it's a doe is a moron.

Sorry HC for the hijack. As to your poll, I agree with Sevens. The person who pulled the trigger on the killing shot gets the credit.

Welllllll, I find it hard to imagine some sport playing the Kewl Hand Luke role (that's how it plays out once they get back to town, of course) and the guide --the professional as it were-- screamimg "shoot, shoot, shoot"!!
And, as usual, everybody has an example of one that doesn't really mean anything.

As far as your poll is concerned, HC, you've posted a couple of others that didn't get overwhelming response and made snotty remarks. As posted, we're not obligated to respond, you know. I liked reading the various responses and their reasoning but, like I said, I thought the scenerios were too made up to deserve an answer.

How could the poll be made better? In a future poll someone could ask "who should call the shot?" Isn't that another way of asking the same question here?

Others would have to answer it since I've never been on a guided deer hunt. But, I've been on lots of guided waterfowl hunts. And the thing I object to most is the guides insisting on calling the shots (after they get more comfortable with me they often relax that rule). But I try to get that straight with guides before the hunt. So far I've never been able to get one to agree beforehand who I don't really know.

I understand their reasons. It's finishing the hunt so they can move on to the next customer or whatever else they need to do. But mostly it's a safety issue.

They will sometimes grudgingly agree to let me use my own duck or goose call. But that doesn't apply to deer...unless you wanted to rattle your own antlers or use a grunt call. I can't imagine a deer guide objecting to that.

quote:

Originally posted by daniel77:
I'd tend to say that the "hunter" in question should not have pulled the trigger in either scenario. He apparently wasn't 100% sure of his target, and thus couldn't be sure what was behind it. Isn't that gun safety 101?
"Sorry your husband is dead, but the guide told me to shoot" isn't a valid excuse.

See what I mean. Without the slightest idea of where these events were playing out nor the circumstances, a self serving remark is made to prove one's rather dubious point.

I'm sorry, lady, I didn't mean to shoot your husband but what was he doing running around the woods wrapped up in a deer skin with a set of antlers tied to his head?? ROFLMFAO "Makes no difference! Yiou should have been absolutely, positively, irrevolkably sure that it wasn't a man parading as a deer before you pulled the trigger. My husband has blue eyes which any fool should have noticed."
Ain't hind sight wonderful. And ain't it great to sit in judgement in the cool, calm atmosphere of cyberspace.

Iswasandforeverwillbebeeman,
Are you having a bad day?

I always beleive that there are two types of people pursuing game, shooters and hunters. Here in the UK we get an awful lot of fat stuck up assholes shooting pheasants (by no means, is everybody who shoots pheasants are asholes)who get driven in a vehicle from stand to stand and just pull the trigger. Then their are those individuals who will carry a shit load of decoys on their back at 4.00am to to shoot ducks in order to set up the decoy rig at low tide. i think the difference is, is that thse individuals who love the outdoors, know about basic fieldcraft and take an interest in the wildlife they are hunting and don't mind working hard to make the shot are okay in my book. those who simply beleive that their cheque book will ensure a good trophy and a good tale in the club are wankers. (I apologise for my rude language but I've had a bottle and a half of red wine and feel in good spirits).

Dan'l77, Nah, just screwin' around. HC wasn't happy with our responses, or lack thereof, and so I thought I stir the pot a bit.

I just read over the original post again and the real question seems to be if the guide made the trophy judgement and the hunter just pulled the trigger is the trophy really the hunter's? Well if you hire a guide generally speaking you are paying him for his expertise in trophy judgement of a particular species that youare not familiar with. The guide is assisting you in your hunt much like I assisted several friends in taking a moose when I lived in Alaska. I feel eventhough I called the moose in and made a trophy judgement the trophy was my friend's. This is how I feel about any guided hunt. If you feel that any asistance in choosing your trophy makes the trophy not yours or somhow diminishes your expereince don't ever hire a guide or PH.

To me a guided hunt conducted properly is a combined expereince for both guide/PH and the hunter where they share the adventure.

In the original post the only problem I found was that it seemed the guide was a litte anxious but I was not there. Otherwise it seemed the hunter followed the guide's recommendation and they both did their jobs ending in the talking of a good trophy.

Mark

See!!! Mark H. Young said the same thing I did! Only he said it better.

I think it was the ghost of Ted Kennedy guiding the shot.

Rich

Ted set another new record for most consecutive days without a drink at midnight last night.

Nosler

If the ghost of Ted Kennedy is around, we know what kind of shot he's looking for.

In either case, I still think it foolish to print such jibberish, and I hope neither were using .270's~ Would have just wounded them anyway!

No matter what the guide says it's up to the shooter to be damned sure of his target.
I used to hunt with a guy that posts on here. That had another just exactly the same thing happen to him.
They were on a huge short grass ranch in CO at dawn hunting coyotes. They saw one on the horizon around 200yds off in the dull light of dawn. He claims his scope was blurred too. Either way it looked like a coyote sitting there watching them. His buddy started telling him: "shoot shoot shoot". SO he shot. When they walked about there guess what they found???

A gray horse with a bullet hole thru it's brain! The rancher looked it over and said he was lucky it was this horse as it was only worth $700 and not one of the others worth over $2000. He paid the rancher $900 to ease his conscience and be sure the full value was paid for.
This is an honest story as I was told by the shooter himself. The rancher told me a few times he still couldn't believe anyone could mistake a horse for a coyote. I dissagree on that. I've seen horse's in such a situation at a distance even in good light. When facing directly at me. The only part in sight has been the face & ears. Close your own eye's and imagine how much both could look like a coyote sitting out there is poor light, ear's sticking up on both and the shape of the head very much resembles the body shape of a coyote at that angle. Does anyone see what I'm trying to say?
IF all you can see is the face looking directly at you.
Be safe or pay dearly for it.