Right or wrong?

[RMK_800]

A guy I know was up hunting when a bull elk came out of the timber running on three legs, the other had been shot off. He went ahead and shot and dropped the elk. While standing over this bull (a little 6x6) another guy came out of the timber and began yelling at him that this was his elk and that he had shot it. The guy I know said he realized that it was shot but he also didn't want to let the elk get away being injured and have to suffer. He also said that he had made the kill shot so he was entitled to the elk. The other guy grabs his gun and... BOOM! shoots the elk right in the head and then said, "Now I made the kill shot!" While the guy was still holding onto the rack! Anyways they called the DOW and the guy I knew wasted a whole day of hunting because he was sure the DOW would award him the elk. Nope, they gave it to the other guy. The guy I know said its because the guy was from Texas and the DOW didn't want to lose the revenue that they bring in. What do you guys think??

 

[stanley]

Huh???? Story sounds like something that plays-out many times every year on public ground. Right up until the conspiracy theory stuff about a hunter from Texas..... LOL Really? Lose revenue? That makes ZERO sense to me, and that's where the story loses credibility to me. Tag/license was already purchased.

What do I think? I think that if I was in your friend's shoes, I would have shot the elk too. The moment the other guy went crazy, I would have walked away and done some more hunting..... ;-)

S.

 

[1911]

Spot on Stanley. The CO/texas cash flow theory is about as retarded as the whole story.

 

[feddoc]

Yea, the cash flow thing doesn't make sense. And, I would get a good ID on azzzzzhole and make sure your buddy can figure out a way to keep an eye out for his rig next year.

Compromise, hell! ... If freedom is right and tyranny is wrong, why should those who believe in freedom treat it as if it were a roll of bologna to be bartered a slice at a time?

 

[sageadvice]

I know it isn't the law everywhere but we always went by "first blood" at home or at least, "first killing blood", when out of state.

Your buddy did the right thing by finishing off the elk. I myself would have been the first to pat the hunter, who shot the leg off, on the back for getting his elk.

Joey

 

[Cornhusker]

The Texas arrogance part sounds very reasonable.

A group of nuts is trying to reestablish the Republic of Texas, claiming it was annexed illegally during a Christmas break without a Congressional majority. I really hope they win although I know that is impossible. I don't buy the conspiracy theory though.

 

[RMK_800]

Hey guys, not once did I say this guy was my "friend"...All I did was write the story he told me. Note that this guy is not a horn hunter at all, he lives basically pay check to pay check...and still has a hard time getting by. The elk would have been meat for his family during the winter, and for that reason is why I think he is so mad.

 

[Roy]

I think it was right for your friend to give it to him based simply on the fact that the dude was using his weapon to enforce his opinion about who killed the elk. Yeah, good one to walk away from, especially over a raghorn 6pt.


HOOK 'EM!

 

[Calif_Mike]

DOW had to make a decision between two people getting the elk. Each guy had a 50/50 chance of getting it but DOW had a 100% chance of somebody getting pissed off. So there would have been no winer no mater what the outcome was.

 

[nfh]

i remember back in the day when i took hunter saftey course this topic came up, and they said whoever draws blood first. so in your case the guy that blew the leg off.

but im taking no ones side here cause i wasnt there..........

 

[scwarrior]

Went through this with a elk on panguitch lake, Dwr said the one who puts the tag on first owns the animal.???

 

[eldorado]

Safer to just walk away. That guy had trouble written all over him.

Eldorado

 

[sageadvice]

There really needs to be a universally recognized rule regarding situations like this. A buddy of mine had a 30+" muley buck taken from him at gunpoint when a guy said he finished off the monster, in the very bottom of a canyon, so it was his.

I know of another freaking monster that was left, when in doubt back out style, overnight. The guys partner finished off the still alive, but not going anywhere buck, the next morning when they both went back up to get it. You guessed it, the guys partner claimed the buck and because the guy that actually shot the buck to begin with is a nice guy, it's hanging on the wall in his past, former partners home. Major BS to that one i'm thinking.

To me, a animal is not worth dieing over but it's a shame when the most physically aggressive hunter gets the animal.

First blood
First Killing blood
killing shot
shot that put him down for good

I don't really care which one should be recognized in all states but one of these, or another one, should be set in stone so there is no doubt who the animal belongs to.

Joey

 

[1911]

I will add this, it is too bad that cooler heads cannot prevail in every circumstance. No doubt they do much of the time but many times one or both parties drop to new lows that just make me shake my head. It is a carcass for crying out loud. Amazing how a little horn, in many cases darn little horn, can make full grown adults act like street thugs. When push comes to shove, there is no amount of horn worth getting shot over. This is the one scenario that turns me off to public land hunting more than anything. Sportsmen are better than this, but alas not everyone in the hills with a rifle is a sportsman. It's a shame really.

 

[HunterHarry]

LAST EDITED ON Oct-26-11 AT 06:43AM (MST)[p]
Some serious hashing of this topic here.

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID33/1634.html

 

[sageman]

All the guys I hunt with were raised with the first blood rule.On public land and we see a buck limping on 3 legs we will put it down and wait 30 min or so if someone comes along tracking the animal we give it to them if not we tag it and take it home.That being said we hunt in Colorado also and were told by Colorado DOW that the killing shot is who owns the animal,so when in Rome..... we follow the Law!

 

[RMK_800]

Here is my opinion on the rule...If your to much of a piss poor shot to make a kill shot, or the animal doesn't offer you a kill shot but you take a shot anyways, I feel like those kind of hunters don't deserve the animal. My dad always taught me that if you can't put the animal down in one shot then there is no shot. just my opinion.