Backing up someone's shot

[bdub]

Just wondering what folks's opinions and personal experiences are on backing up or having someone backup your shot. Do you mind your friend/hunting partner or guide shooting at the same animal after the initial shot or vice versa. Under what conditions would you find this ok or not. Just curious. Thanks

[Sledhead71]

Your question opens up a can of worms :)

The legalities would certainly be an issue...

There are places such as Africa that this may be an acceptable practice, but big game here, well under the letter of the law, your "friend" may actually be labelled the forbidden word.

If you both carried the same tag for that species, then the argument may be "who" cuts their tag.

[deanmc]

Really?:thinking-006:Admitting to illegal actions on a public forum would not be the best way to start a sunday imo.

[j3006]

Not a problem if you have a partner draw tag.

[Dadirk]

Under some circumstances you speak of it is Illegal, As a guide in Alberta you arent permitted to carry a gun except while Grizzly guiding (BC requires the guide to carry) ( 15 years ago that was the law) If the person backing you has a license for that species it is legal if they dont it is poaching. If they have a licence and you ask for the help or provide a backup it would be the first shooters call. I have been asked several times by members of our hunting group 2 of them have Whitey phobia, My brother for instance has shot 3 mule deer over 180 but as soon as it comes to a whitetail he suffers a melt down and cant shoot them cleanly so in the past I have been asked several times to provide as a backup.

[bdub]

Wasn't really trying to get into the illegal/legal discussion thing. Just more wondering for the guys who been on dangerous game hunts or if two friends were out hunting whitetails or sheep or whatever and both had tags type of thing. Just wondering how you feel about it and handle it under various conditions. Thanks for the input.

[catnthehat]

Wasn't really trying to get into the illegal/legal discussion thing. Just more wondering for the guys who been on dangerous game hunts or if two friends were out hunting whitetails or sheep or whatever and both had tags type of thing. Just wondering how you feel about it and handle it under various conditions. Thanks for the input.

Go by the law, that way there is no "if's and's or but's " and there is no grey area to argue about!:thinking-006:
Any person shooting should be prepared to tag the animal and have that tag with them.
Cat

[riden]

I never liked it.

I find guys that say they will take "2nd shot" really just want to shoot your animal for you.

[bdub]

Go by the law, that way there is no "if's and's or but's " and there is no grey area to argue about!:thinking-006:
Cat

Maybe I should have worded it differently. "If it is legal to do so." Not wondering about the legalities, everyone should know when it is legal or not, just wondering about peoples thoughts/experience with the situation is all.

[billie]

I've been asked in the past and responded with coaching to encourage the shooter to make the best shot he can. No second shot was ever needed.

As to the OP, IMO no, legal or not. If one shooter can't handle the situation then likely there are other actions required, such as maybe getting closer, more range time, breathe.....in.....out....relax.....focus?

I tend to agree with riden.

[Dick284]

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b28/Dick284/canofworms.jpg

[Sledhead71]

Maybe I should have worded it differently. "If it is legal to do so." Not wondering about the legalities, everyone should know when it is legal or not, just wondering about peoples thoughts/experience with the situation is all.

Been on many dangerous game hunts where the PH does carry a weapon just in case someones "safety" is compromised. But, at many a thousand a tag, I think the hunter should finish what they set out to do :)

One question to ask yourself.. If someone made a marginal original shot, and said friend actually kills / harvested this species, WHO tags the animal ? Second shooter should be prepared to cut their tag when they raise their weapon of choice.

[Speckle55]

Most meat hunters don,t care and if both have tags then no problem .. when doing drives and the guys/gals yell he is coming out wounded take him after they bush shoot the deer and all hunters have tag.. most trophy hunters will and should not get into this back-up shots as is not part of the fair chase rules in most cases.. if you don,t have the tag for the animal you were asked to back-up shoot then don,t do it.. for Bull Moose its the partner tag or in Camp Wainwright with my boy i could of backed him up when he was young and shooting under my tags but i didn,t .. this last year's hunt i didn,t because i was just a guide ... wished i could of back him up as he had a bedded 190 plus Mule deer at 72 yds that got away on us .. but hey thats hunting right .. that buck is now called the Hair Cut Buck and if anyone sees him or gets him in the next couple years pm me ..

On some animals years ago like Bull Moose we would go on count down then shoot .. 3 / 2/ 1/ Boom boom and two shots about 1/2 a inch apart :fighting0007: .. 350 yard shot.. fun over /work started/ both familys fed.. both of us had tags

David :)

[bdub]

I've been asked in the past and responded with coaching to encourage the shooter to make the best shot he can. No second shot was ever needed.

As to the OP, IMO no, legal or not. If one shooter can't handle the situation then likely there are other actions required, such as maybe getting closer, more range time, breathe.....in.....out....relax.....focus?

I tend to agree with riden.

Thanks for the answer. How about if it was dangerous game like cape buffalo or something similar.

[billie]

Definitely true Dick, but only if it gets derailed. IMO, many of these canned goods should be discussed for the younger hunters. Not everyone has access to a long term hunting camp with friends and family to discuss these topics, where many of us older guys got their, dare I say ethics, from.

Regrettably this thread will likely turn into toilet fodder too.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b28/Dick284/canofworms.jpg

[catnthehat]

Thanks for the answer. How about if it was dangerous game like cape buffalo or something similar.

Letter of the law, PERIOD!:thinking-006:
Cat

[Dick284]

The problem with threads of this nature, is there can be but only a single answer to the question, and that is, what does the law say.

To discuss the what ifs and you know what's, only allows a great big brush to come out and allow us all to be painted a not so nice color.

We all to well know that reality and legality often don't mesh to well, let's put a lid on this can of worms by saying, junior just pm some of us longer in the tooth fellers, and we'll talk this out over a soda or a coffee.

[billie]

I took it as a North American situation and have no experience with dangerous. I think that situation would be quite different and safety would have to be factored in. The northern big bears would be similar situation.

Thanks for the answer. How about if it was dangerous game like cape buffalo or something similar.

[billie]

Letter of the law, PERIOD!:thinking-006:
Cat

We are talking legal (at least I am), the OP was clarified.

[Acesneights]

Letter of the law, PERIOD!:thinking-006:
Cat

What's your problem catnthehat it sounds like you are so bitter about this topic that you can't have a sensible conversation.

[catnthehat]

We are talking legal (at least I am), the OP was clarified.

The letter of the law says you need a tag to shoot at something , you have better be prepared to tag it!

If two people are shooting at the same animal, then one is shooting and not tagging, and that is illegal!
There is no grey area g=here except for what someone perceives, and what a person may think is right may well be against the law.
Cat

[catnthehat]

What's your problem catnthehat it sounds like you are so bitter about this topic that you can't have a sensible conversation.

Sensible conversation?
What is sensible about skirting the law to the point that you are teaching someone to break it?
Cat

[Lefty-Canuck]

If it became a choice of an animal getting away and having to suffer and a humane kill...follow the law and ensure you have a tag for what you are shooting.

When my Son is old enough to hunt I will hope he is able to make a one shot kill....if not I will have a deer tag in my pocket to assist if need be....

LC

[Dick284]

What's your problem catnthehat it sounds like you are so bitter about this topic that you can't have a sensible conversation.

What's your problem, don't you realize as soon as you post that you are willing to break the law on an open forum you smear all of us as anything but willing to follow the rules.

On this forum there can be but only one answer!

Anything but and guess where that takes us!

Follow the law and it isn't complicated!

Don't follow the law and it gets to complicated!

Somebody please lock this thread!?!?!

[Mtnbowhunter]

I would probably never hunt with that person again if they took a shot at something I was going after or had got a shot in to. (That is if it was even legal in the area that was being hunted)

[burbotman]

OP you should have added the phrase "when legal to do so, with both hunters carrying the applicable tag"

Perhaps then you would have got the discussion you were looking for as opposed to end result of most threads these days.

Discussion forum. Should be a good topic to discuss

[deanmc]

What's your problem catnthehat it sounds like you are so bitter about this topic that you can't have a sensible conversation.

This is your example a sensible conversation? There are very few on here as sensible and fair as cat. Your accusation towards him only makes you look foolish.

[dan1]

Just wondering what folks's opinions and personal experiences are on backing up or having someone backup your shot. Do you mind your friend/hunting partner or guide shooting at the same animal after the initial shot or vice versa. Under what conditions would you find this ok or not. Just curious. Thanks

IMO there's no need for anyone "backing up" your shot. If you cannot make the shot you shouldn't havve taken it in the first place.

[burbotman]

IMO there's no need for anyone "backing up" your shot. If you cannot make the shot you shouldn't havve taken it in the first place.

For the most part I agree with the above. However looking to this fall with my 14 yr olds first hunt. While he is spending lots of time getting ready, and understands that the only shot he will be allowed to take is one that he can make I would be prepared to "back him" up if needed and only if LEGAL (notice the legal in bold) If I did have to back up with a kill shot my tag would go on

Now this is an unlikely scenario as it would only occur if an obvious wounded animal would not be retrieved with out the back up. Every effort and expectation is for my son to complete the harvest

Posted this to add to the discussion request of the op

[billie]

Regrettably this thread will likely turn into toilet fodder too.

Honest question asked.
Legalities reasonably suggested as a condition.
Accusation of illegal activity.
Clarified that no illegal activity intended or implied.

Turned to toilet fodder.

Why can't a simple question be asked rather than derailing the conversation with unsubstantialted accusations? H3ll, pretend you are chatting with your best friend. Would you attack his suggestion first, or get an explanation to something you MAY disagree with? No wonder so many discussions go poorly.

Bye.

[Saul Goode]

I believe that alot of guides in Alaska do some follow up shots on their Brown Bear Hunts. I've heard stories and even seen some videos of this occurying quite abit. Some cases the guide is getting off more rounds then the hunter. I'm not sure if it is legal but they have no problem showing it or taking about it.

[Dick284]

Why would air all your dirty laundry in public?

This site has been sourced in the past for quotes in the media.

Wanna be painted a dirty color, keep acting like your in private when you are far from private.

Some topics are better left un posted, and delt with in a more discrete manner, that's all, and that's not any toilet fodder either!

[catnthehat]

Legal hunting would mean my partner ha a tag and is prepared to tag that animal if he was the last person to shoot at it- no question.
I have a BIG problem with people shooting last then saying " well there ya go, he's yours" has happened before but won't happen again!
Cat

[HunterDave]

Oh yeah, it's a can of worms alright. :lol:

I'm not sure why people are so quick to point towards this as being illegal? There are instances where it would be perfectly legal to find yourself legally putting a second bullet into an animal that your partner shot first.......partner licence or you hold a tag for the animal.

On the illegal side - There are a ton of scenerios that someone could use and some of them will involve ethics vs legalities. If your hunting partner shoots a deer and it lays suffering ten feet away from you and it'll take him 10 minutes to get to it would you not put a bullet into it to end it's suffering or would you stand there and watch because it'd be illegal? If you would stand there and watch I hope that the sight of a deer thrashing around bawling in pain haunts you forever. :mad0100: Given that situation and a F&W Officer was standing beside you I'm willing to bet that he'd give you the go ahead to end it.

Given the same scenerio, if you had a tag would you claim the animal as yours? Good luck finding someone to hunt with you again with anyone that I've ever met.

I'm pro legal hunting but I'm even more pro common sense. If I ever get hurt and you have to rush me to the hospital I want to know that you'll break the law and exceed the speed limit to get me there quickly, not follow the speed limit because you'd be breaking the law.

Find a good hunting partner with similar values as your own and you'll never have a problem. I'm very fortunate to have someone to hunt with that shares the same upbringing and experience that I have and we've never had any sort of problem whatsoever knowing what the right thing to do was.

[happy honker]

I think the o/p meant a situation when both shooters had tags, no?
That's the way I interpreted it anyway. Funny how everyone jumps on the negative immediately.

I remember this exact situation occurring about 20 years ago, my brother and I both with general WT tags. We were on stand together on a cut line when a deer appeared at what we both felt was the maximum edge of our comfort range (400 yds).
The deer was giving us lots of time, and we were both shooting from a rest position. Broadside, feeding. (the deer, not us!)
We decided to both shoot at the same time, our reasoning was that we would just "get this done"., and with 2 of us shooting on the "count of three"...we just went confidently that it would be a "no miss" situation.
We were pretty young, and gave it no more thought than that. We didn't debate who would tag it, just knew one of us would. And we did.
We made a clean kill, on the spot, with two through the vitals.
As I recall, my brother tagged it, as he didn't have as much time to hunt that year as I did.
Although I saw nothing wrong with this at the time, and never questioned it morally or ethically, and certainly not legally (we both had tags) until this thread, it happened, I have no regrets.

Would I do it again? Probably not, I'm way more likely to let a deer keep walking at my age now....400 yds is now about 100 yds past my confidence range, i don't shoot as much as I did back then and only practice regularly at 100 and 200 yds, with a couple of pre season shots out to 350, just to make sure.

As I type this, I remember the exact situation also occurring while goose hunting from a grassline, when we watched a coyote cross the field right towards where we were hiding....same deal, "on three"....we both let loose at 15yds with #2 shot....the purpose was to ensure a clean kill....literally "overkill". It worked, it felt like the right thing to do.

Both of these situations the main purpose was to ensure a clean kill. Maybe a bit of including and sharing in the experience thrown in for good measure, but clean kill was the main objective.

Don't flame me too much, after all, I'm talking about 2 kills in over 30 years of hunting.
These were both situations where it felt right to do exactly as the situation the o/p described.

[AxeMan]

Well said, HunterDave!

[billie]

Why would air all your dirty laundry in public?


What dirty laundry? The OP's shorts were clean until someone else tried to dirty them for him, which he then clarified.

Legal hunting would mean my partner ha a tag and is prepared to tag that animal if he was the last person to shoot at it- no question.
I have a BIG problem with people shooting last then saying " well there ya go, he's yours" has happened before but won't happen again!
Cat

This is the point. Isn't this a better response?

Jumping to "guilty" until "proven innocent" by the AO athletic commitee. Cut the posters some slack and offer the benefit of the doubt instead. I believe these type of posts, predominantly, are made because someone wants help and opinions from like minded enthusiasts and not condemnation for something they didn't even do.

[billie]

You can hunt with me any time HD :).

[Cal]

I believe that alot of guides in Alaska do some follow up shots on their Brown Bear Hunts. I've heard stories and even seen some videos of this occurying quite abit. Some cases the guide is getting off more rounds then the hunter. I'm not sure if it is legal but they have no problem showing it or taking about it.

Yeah, during my road trip up there I never met a guide that was shy about talking about the backup shots he had taken.

I've been asked to but wont, I had a relative try and make a kill shot on a mortaly wounded Mule deer this fall. I had gotten a marginal hit with my bow, the animal was dieing but too lively to aproach for a kill shot so I told my relative to keep an eye on it while I went back for the truck. When I got back the deer was gone and he was looking for his arrow. We did find the deer but I will never hunt with him again.

[bdub]

Round up the posse and bring the rope, holy moly folks. Just brought up the subject because I watched a video on Buffalo hunting and it was a topic of discussion between the client and PH. Seems some hunters don't mind and others do. It got me thinking about my own experience with it and how I felt about it under the various circumstances and was just hoping to have a discussion on the topic and get others people's thoughts on the subject. I have been backed up and backed up others (insert legally here). The situation was discussed prior to and I appreciated it when I had asked for it and vice versa. Thanks.

[KegRiver]

Round up the posse and bring the rope, holy moly folks. Just brought up the subject because I watched a video on Buffalo hunting and it was a topic of discussion between the client and PH. Seems some hunters don't mind and others do. It got me thinking about my own experience with it and how I felt about it under the various circumstances and was just hoping to have a discussion on the topic and get others people's thoughts on the subject. I have been backed up and backed up others (insert legally here). The situation was discussed prior to and I appreciated it when I had asked for it and vice versa. Thanks.

To you it may seem like a simple question.
Problem is, folks can't read your mind.

In your OP you do not say what area you are asking about. The answer to your question would be different for different countries and probably for different provinces.

The fact is, this can be a very tricky situation. There are legal considerations, personal preference considerations and safety concerns.

Because of the nature of the situation you ask about, the question has to be specific and clear, yours was neither.

The problem here is not the responses, it's the question.

[burbotman]

To you it may seem like a simple question.
Problem is, folks can't read your mind.

In your OP you do not say what area you are asking about. The answer to your question would be different for different countries and probably for different provinces.

The fact is, this can be a very tricky situation. There are legal considerations, personal preference considerations and safety concerns.

Because of the nature of the situation you ask about, the question has to be specific and clear, yours was neither.

The problem here is not the responses, it's the question.


Bdub, I think you posed a good question for discussion on a hunting discussion forum. Some good posts on the topic once the legality issue was clarified, although I never read that the op suggested anything other than a legal situation
HDave I like your post on common sense

[Lefty-Canuck]

Just wondering what folks's opinions and personal experiences are on backing up or having someone backup your shot. Do you mind your friend/hunting partner or guide shooting at the same animal after the initial shot or vice versa. Under what conditions would you find this ok or not. Just curious. Thanks

Pretty simple question....lots of folks jumped in and on before reading the whole thing I think.

Lot of reading into it....legalities aside, it comes down to personal choice/ethics all of which open another can if worms :)

To answer the OP question,

No I wouldn't mind if it was legal and prediscussed with my hunting partner...game plans must always be predetermined.

If it was legal and prediscussed I would find it ok, if it was not legal or not prediscussed then no it is not ok.

This being said I have aided a hunter in finding/ collecting his harvest (fully legal under the circumstances) I might add.

LC

[bdub]

Bdub, I think you posed a good question for discussion on a hunting discussion forum. Some good posts on the topic once the legality issue was clarified, although I never read that the op suggested anything other than a legal situation
HDave I like your post on common sense

I didn't think it was such a strange or taboo topic for a hunting discussion either. May be good topic for younger and older hunters to think about. If you were in a legal situation to shoot would you back up someone if they made a poor shot on an animal that would mean losing or causing unnecessary suffering to the animal for example. Not just thinking about it from a dangerous game situation but other angles as well. In a dangerous game situation I would see it as an obligation for the guide to go ahead and let fly if the situation dictated it.

[MKD]

Letter of the law, PERIOD!:thinking-006:
Cat

It is left to the discretion of the PH in most jurisdictions in Africa under the law.

However, the paying customer usually dictates their preference regarding back up/ follow up. (until a safety concern arises then the PH is required to act.)

[KegRiver]

I didn't think it was such a strange or taboo topic for a hunting discussion either. May be good topic for younger and older hunters to think about. If you were in a legal situation to shoot would you back up someone if they made a poor shot on an animal that would mean losing or causing unnecessary suffering to the animal for example. Not just thinking about it from a dangerous game situation but other angles as well. In a dangerous game situation I would see it as an obligation for the guide to go ahead and let fly if the situation dictated it.

I agree, it is a good question, nothing taboo about it. It's a question I have contemplated myself.

For me the answer is simple. I only hunt in Alberta and don't expect I'll ever hunt anywhere else, and even though it is illegal in the case of animials that require tagging it is not illegal for all animals.

Since you were not specific about what animal or class of animals, I can give two answers that would fit the current legalities.

If it were a animal that required tagging, then no I would not because it's against the law.

If on the other hand if the animal being hunted was a problem animal such as a Coyote or a Bear on private property that I had permission to hunt bears on, then I would if my hunting partner requested I back him or her up.

[burbotman]

I agree, it is a good question, nothing taboo about it. It's a question I have contemplated myself.

For me the answer is simple. I only hunt in Alberta and don't expect I'll ever hunt anywhere else, and even though it is illegal in the case of animials that require tagging it is not illegal for all animals.

Since you were not specific about what animal or class of animals, I can give two answers that would fit the current legalities.

If it were a animal that required tagging, then no I would not because it's against the law.

If on the other hand if the animal being hunted was a problem animal such as a Coyote or a Bear on private property that I had permission to hunt bears on, then I would if my hunting partner requested I back him or her up.

Keg a question for you that has me questioning my own understanding. If both hunters have the proper tag and hunter A wounds the animal, hunter B backs things up and puts the kill shot. Hunter B then tags the animal. Is this legal by the letter of the law?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Keg a question for you that has me questioning my own understanding. If both hunters have the proper tag and hunter A wounds the animal, hunter B backs things up and puts the kill shot. Hunter B then tags the animal. Is this legal by the letter of the law?

As to the letter of the law this is correct....

Another scenario, 2 guys are hunting crown land (they do not know each other)....hunter A shoots a deer and the deer runs .....hunter B encounters the deer and shoots it dead....the deer is hunter B's deer, as the law states upon recovery he would be required by law to immediately tag that animal.

I suppose if hunter A found the deer before hunter B then there would be some talking and decisions to be made....

LC

[burbotman]

As to the letter of the law this is correct....

Another scenario, 2 guys are hunting crown land (they do not know each other)....hunter A shoots a deer and the deer runs .....hunter B encounters the deer and shoots it dead....the deer is hunter B's deer, as the law states upon recovery he would be required by law to immediately tag that animal.

I suppose if hunter A found the deer before hunter B then there would be some talking and decisions to be made....

LC

Thanks lefty, this has always been my understanding Kegs response had me wondering

[Don K]

Oh yeah, it's a can of worms alright. :lol:

I'm not sure why people are so quick to point towards this as being illegal? There are instances where it would be perfectly legal to find yourself legally putting a second bullet into an animal that your partner shot first.......partner licence or you hold a tag for the animal.

On the illegal side - There are a ton of scenerios that someone could use and some of them will involve ethics vs legalities. If your hunting partner shoots a deer and it lays suffering ten feet away from you and it'll take him 10 minutes to get to it would you not put a bullet into it to end it's suffering or would you stand there and watch because it'd be illegal? If you would stand there and watch I hope that the sight of a deer thrashing around bawling in pain haunts you forever. :mad0100: Given that situation and a F&W Officer was standing beside you I'm willing to bet that he'd give you the go ahead to end it.

Given the same scenerio, if you had a tag would you claim the animal as yours? Good luck finding someone to hunt with you again with anyone that I've ever met.

I'm pro legal hunting but I'm even more pro common sense. If I ever get hurt and you have to rush me to the hospital I want to know that you'll break the law and exceed the speed limit to get me there quickly, not follow the speed limit because you'd be breaking the law.

Find a good hunting partner with similar values as your own and you'll never have a problem. I'm very fortunate to have someone to hunt with that shares the same upbringing and experience that I have and we've never had any sort of problem whatsoever knowing what the right thing to do was.

Well said. I'll honestly admit I've finished a few badly wounded animals before. It's what you do... Animals don't need to suffer and it's not fair for that animal, to wait for all hunters to arrive, IMO. First guy there can finish the job if you're split up tracking a wounded animal. Why push it further? It's terrified and you're not doing it or yourselves any favors...
Dangerous game? Definitely...
I wish I had backup on a bear hunt once cause it almost ended really bad for me.
I think it's important to look at each situation specifically. Sometimes I think it's totally justifiable.
Watching down my lane way for the flashing lights! As I'm sur the Internet police are on their way! Lol

[Rhino81]

Oh yeah, it's a can of worms alright. :lol:

I'm not sure why people are so quick to point towards this as being illegal? There are instances where it would be perfectly legal to find yourself legally putting a second bullet into an animal that your partner shot first.......partner licence or you hold a tag for the animal.

On the illegal side - There are a ton of scenerios that someone could use and some of them will involve ethics vs legalities. If your hunting partner shoots a deer and it lays suffering ten feet away from you and it'll take him 10 minutes to get to it would you not put a bullet into it to end it's suffering or would you stand there and watch because it'd be illegal? If you would stand there and watch I hope that the sight of a deer thrashing around bawling in pain haunts you forever. :mad0100: Given that situation and a F&W Officer was standing beside you I'm willing to bet that he'd give you the go ahead to end it.

Given the same scenerio, if you had a tag would you claim the animal as yours? Good luck finding someone to hunt with you again with anyone that I've ever met.

I'm pro legal hunting but I'm even more pro common sense. If I ever get hurt and you have to rush me to the hospital I want to know that you'll break the law and exceed the speed limit to get me there quickly, not follow the speed limit because you'd be breaking the law.

Find a good hunting partner with similar values as your own and you'll never have a problem. I'm very fortunate to have someone to hunt with that shares the same upbringing and experience that I have and we've never had any sort of problem whatsoever knowing what the right thing to do was.that was said perfectly! Find a good hunting partner you can relate to and you guys decide. I don't have a problem with it. If i did i would be a hypocrite.

[Rhino81]

Just wondering what folks's opinions and personal experiences are on backing up or having someone backup your shot. Do you mind your friend/hunting partner or guide shooting at the same animal after the initial shot or vice versa. Under what conditions would you find this ok or not. Just curious. Thanks

As a guide in alberta, we are not allowed to carry a firearm at work let alone back a client up on a shot. Most don't need backup.

[catnthehat]

What dirty laundry? The OP's shorts were clean until someone else tried to dirty them for him, which he then clarified.



This is the point. Isn't this a better response?

Jumping to "guilty" until "proven innocent" by the AO athletic commitee. Cut the posters some slack and offer the benefit of the doubt instead. I believe these type of posts, predominantly, are made because someone wants help and opinions from like minded enthusiasts and not condemnation for something they didn't even do.
The question had nothing to do with ethics and everything to do with a question concerning the law.
And no, I am not the "AO ethics committee".
The slack was cut when i told him to go by the letter of the law.
Now go bash someone else if you want to argue.

Cat

[KegRiver]

Keg a question for you that has me questioning my own understanding. If both hunters have the proper tag and hunter A wounds the animal, hunter B backs things up and puts the kill shot. Hunter B then tags the animal. Is this legal by the letter of the law?


You are right, I was thinking that it I would not put my tag on someone else's animal, therefor it would be illegal for me.

I should have been specific about that.

I thought it would be understood since it had already been established that it would be legal if I had the appropriate tag and if I tagged the animal.

I was distracted and wasn't clear, my mistake.

[Speckle55]

Here is the Can of Worms .. i hope you would back up your partner because i would in a millisecond.. WOW

Food for Thought

David:)

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=U-yube+Lion+attacks+hunter&docid=4804080728670472&mid=51B2E14889C3630C519251B2E14889C3630C5192&view=detail&FORM=VIRE3

[Dick84]

When I first read the question I totally understood what you were asking and didn't see the harm in it, but that's because I grew up hunting in Ontario where as long you held a license for the species you could also shoot your partners tag if you no longer had yours or if they had a draw for that species,and of course the laws are much different here in Alberta.
To answer your question while we hunted moose there it was always known that within our group we backed each other up and put the animal down as quickly as possible because it seemed right to finish the animal as quickly as possible and putting it on the ground quickly meant the difference from having to pull it from the nice cut where we seen it or having to try to get it out of that swamp a couple hundred yards away that it might of made it to. To us it was more about the meat than anything, and it was always a great feeling having taken part of harvesting an animal with a close friend or relative. Of course that's just my opinion and others may think differently. So where legal and if it's okay within the group I see no problem with it.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Party hunting, from what I know, is legal in Ontario....in Alberta it is not.

LC

[Speckle55]

some Animals i have shot have been claimed by others before i could get to them .. so i just walked away and never even got into a arguement with that person:argue2:

Food for Thought

David:)

[Big Daddy Badger]

Just wondering what folks's opinions and personal experiences are on backing up or having someone backup your shot. Do you mind your friend/hunting partner or guide shooting at the same animal after the initial shot or vice versa. Under what conditions would you find this ok or not. Just curious. Thanks

Who cares?

Seriously... as long as its legal and not like Custers Last Stand with 15 guys drawing a bead on one deer a half mile away and basically carpet bombing the damn thing... who cares what others think?

I don't generally ask for one but have.

On one occasion I am convinced my partner probably saved my life with a
backup shot. Picture a charging moose and me trying to reload the muzzy.

So yeah... its OK albiet nobodys desired norm.

[AxeMan]

some Animals i have shot have been claimed by others before i could get to them .. so i just walked away and never even got into a arguement with that person:argue2:

Food for Thought

David:)

Shoot them from closer range and that wouldn't happen. :scared0018:
Food for Thought....
Just kidding...David...:)

[Speckle55]

Shoot them from closer range and that wouldn't happen. :scared0018:
Food for Thought....
Just kidding...David...:)


define animals please

See i was checking to see if anyone was a Lawyer here because if you assume then you are making a ass out of me and a ass out of you as i learned when negotiating million dollar contracts
Example
if there are 3 guys all friends/family on a firing line hunting geese as the fly out of a valley heading to feed in the morning and you all are taking geese as they fly over sometimes backing up the other hunters in your party or they are backing u up.. is there anything illegal going on ?

then as you are shooting another group drives up and moves in close to you guys and starts shooting when the next flock passes over and then a flock passes over you and you knock one down and the other group runs out and snags your goose do you argue .. nope you walk away

if you argue you could get hurt like happen in Sask .. as the group walk away and turn to argue one more time... one from the party that took the bird shot and took out one of the guys eye with the #2 shot .. actual case in Sask

answered bdub's question

Food for Thought

David:)

[AxeMan]

You lost me man. Sorry, I was just trying to make light of your long range skills but I think you took it the wrong way. Forget it.

[Speckle55]

You lost me man. Sorry, I was just trying to make light of your long range skills but I think you took it the wrong way. Forget it.

hey i was seeing if people would guess my meaning and not ask me to explain .. because bdub did explain and other's still jumped on his question

Wow every one is a Lawyer

on my long range skills .. whats done is done and i can't change that:fighting0007:

didn't mean i was to far away the guy ran out in front of me as i walk to my bird

David:)

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=U-yube+Lion+attacks+hunter&docid=4804080728670472&mid=51B2E14889C3630C519251B2E14889C3630C5192&view=detail&FORM=VIRE3

[Rennich98]

I know I wold rather someone have a follow up on me than me wounding an animal and losing it in the bush

[BeeGuy]

Maybe someone could take the time to post the law so that the discussion could proceed with everyone on the same page.

[Don K]

So yeah... its OK albiet nobodys desired norm.

X2

[billie]

Maybe someone could take the time to post the law so that the discussion could proceed with everyone on the same page



It is unlawful to

● carry or use another person's licence or tag or allow another person to use your licence or tag.


I don't believe there is another specific reference in the regulations beyond this one. There is an exception for a "Partner" license for moose and bison, and any other draw, but only if the partner is a youth (12-17).

[rwm1273]

I know I wold rather someone have a follow up on me than me wounding an animal and losing it in the bush

A couple years ago I was hunting with one of our group, and he took a shot at a nice buck. Lots of time to line up, and it was about 75m away. I saw it hit, and when I got out of the truck to where he was standing, the animal had disappeared. I heard from one of our other friends that this was not the first easy shot that was missed, and that next time I should line up on the animal too. We looked for that buck for the next 6 hours. Only found a couple blood drops, and never did find it. I still feel bad about it. I hate seeing an animal wounded because of a bad shot.

[Speckle55]

yep i had one friend this year hit a deer at 150 that we had to track down .. i didn,t back him up .. we got 2hrs later

here is another back up shot video on you-tube enjoy

if you have a tag for the animal your shooting at then nothing is illegal as Bdub posted

sometimes i will back up my young shooter's with a shotgun on grouse or Wabbits if they miss with the 22.. as my father did with me and then my boy's

David:)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQzLAlVn-qc

[pikeslayer22]

As to the letter of the law this is correct....

Another scenario, 2 guys are hunting crown land (they do not know each other)....hunter A shoots a deer and the deer runs .....hunter B encounters the deer and shoots it dead....the deer is hunter B's deer, as the law states upon recovery he would be required by law to immediately tag that animal.

I suppose if hunter A found the deer before hunter B then there would be some talking and decisions to be made....

LC
Kind of like a ram that was shot in Cadomin on film. Hunter A wounded it with a bow, then hunter B killed it with a rifle. I always thought it was hunter A's animal in this situation.

[bdub]

Kind of like a ram that was shot in Cadomin on film. Hunter A wounded it with a bow, then hunter B killed it with a rifle. I always thought it was hunter A's animal in this situation.

How about if said ram was arrowed 1 hour, 2 hours or 2 days previous. Or if said ram was unknown to have been previously shot by another hunter? Definitely some tough scenarios that can and do come up and some situations that call for common sense and diplomacy.

[catnthehat]

Kind of like a ram that was shot in Cadomin on film. Hunter A wounded it with a bow, then hunter B killed it with a rifle. I always thought it was hunter A's animal in this situation.

I can't remember if the rifle hunters knew they were there or if they saw him shoot it with the bow.
I wouldn't have shot it if I knew it had an arrow in it.
If I did not know it had been shot minutes before?

If they knew that there was an arrow in it, that's pretty low and disrespectful, but legally I believe they were entitled to the ram because they killed it with the rifle.

I haven't needed to cross that bridge yet on a sheep.
If the hunters knew if fact that the sheep was shot with the arrow first, that is not "backing up someone's shot" , however, as the hunters were not hunting together.

I do know that Fred Bear shot a number of polar bears before he got one that died with a arrow only , and not from gunfire, and that is the bear that is in the P&Y books as the others do not qualify because the rifles were used.
Cat

[bdub]

I can't remember if the rifle hunters knew they were there or if they saw him shoot it with the bow.
I wouldn't have shot it if I knew it had an arrow in it.
If I did not know it had been shot minutes before?

If they knew that there was an arrow in it, that's pretty low and disrespectful, but legally I believe they were entitled to the ram because they killed it with the rifle.

I haven't needed to cross that bridge yet on a sheep.
If the hunters knew if fact that the sheep was shot with the arrow first, that is not "backing up someone's shot" , however, as the hunters were not hunting together.

I do know that Fred Bear shot a number of polar bears before he got one that died with a arrow only , and not from gunfire, and that is the bear that is in the P&Y books as the others do not qualify because the rifles were used.
Cat

The ram in question was unknown to be wounded by the rifle hunters in this particular situation.

[catnthehat]

The ram in question was unknown to be wounded by the rifle hunters in this particular situation.
There ram then!
Cat

[Speckle55]

Here is the story from the guy that shot that ram and Archie story is the post video on that post

David:)

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=109834&highlight=Archie+nesbitt

[Sledhead71]

Just wondering what folks's opinions and personal experiences are on backing up or having someone backup your shot. Do you mind your friend/hunting partner or guide shooting at the same animal after the initial shot or vice versa. Under what conditions would you find this ok or not. Just curious. Thanks

Back to the OP initial question :)

This would not be asked if your friend held a licence for this species you both were hunting or if your legal PH was allowed to carry for safety reasons. Simply put there is no grey area and if your fine with this and was discussed, rock on and no question needed to be asked about this issue.

But I don't think this is the case here... For discussion purposes lets use a practical real life situation like filming a bear hunt. I have ran camera and been the shooter in this situation and have got clarification as to what is required... So being the camera guy and carrying the shotty, I was required to have a valid wildlife certificate and a bear tag with no intention of doing anything else but running camera and packing a shotty just in case. It was very clearly stated by SERM that the carrying of a weapon during an open season required a valid licence, period, even with no intention of harvesting a bear.

Dave states that humanly dispatching an animal is the right thing to do and I agree whole heartedly.. It is obvious that the person who has the opportunity to dispatch this animal would have a valid licence as they are carrying a weapon.. Turn this around and the person who dispatches the animal does not have a valid licence and by the letter of the law, well your breaking it. In this case, why would the person be packing and aiding in the hunt in the first place ?

In my eyes, if you hold a valid licence you are not "backing up" anyone, your hunting....

[elkhunter11]

Dave states that humanly dispatching an animal is the right thing to do and I agree whole heartedly.. It is obvious that the person who has the opportunity to dispatch this animal would have a valid licence as they are carrying a weapon.. Turn this around and the person who dispatches the animal does not have a valid licence and by the letter of the law, well your breaking it. In this case, why would the person be packing and aiding in the hunt in the first place ?

That isn't always the case.I hunt elk with three different groups of people, depending on the time and location. In each case, it is common for some of us to have general elk tags, and some of us to have special antlerless tags, so we all have tags that allow us to legally hunt elk, but only some of us can legally harvest an antlered bull, while others can only legally harvest an antlerless elk. As well, usually one or two of us will draw moose tags, in case we encounter a moose, while hunting elk. The bottom line, is that legally ,you can only shoot at animals that you have a tag for, regardless of the tags that your hunting partners have.

[Sledhead71]

That isn't always the case.I hunt elk with three different groups of people, depending on the time and location. In each case, it is common for some of us to have general elk tags, and some of us to have special antlerless tags, so we all have tags that allow us to legally hunt elk, but only some of us can legally harvest an antlered bull, while others can only legally harvest an antlerless elk. As well, usually one or two of us will draw moose tags, in case we encounter a moose, while hunting elk. The bottom line, is that legally ,you can only shoot at animals that you have a tag for, regardless of the tags that your hunting partners have.

Agee with you Elk, in some instances of course there will be multiple species open where a group holds valid tags. As you indicate you can only shoot animals that YOU carry a valid tag for.

Pretty simple really

[Lefty-Canuck]

Kind of like a ram that was shot in Cadomin on film. Hunter A wounded it with a bow, then hunter B killed it with a rifle. I always thought it was hunter A's animal in this situation.

Hunter A in this case was offered the ram but did not take it because the fact it was dispatched by a rifle it would not qualify for an archery record....so he had his reasons for handing it over and actually he got to hunt for a bigger ram.

LC

[pikeslayer22]

Yeah i know how it turned out my question is around the legalities? So basically hunter A could take it or leave it? Seemed like more of a moral decision in this case.

[bdub]

I hunted with a friend in Telegraph creek country a few times for grizzly. We understood each other and backed each other up on two grizzlies. The first one no backup shot was taken and on the second the bear was hit four times. We understood each other and thought about it the same way, make a safe and humane harvest.

The Buffalo hunting video made it appear that some hunters egos got in the way and they put pressure on the PH to not back them up unless things really went haywire. I just thought that would be a strange way to think of it. If and when I ever got the chance to experience a Cape buffalo hunt I would expect and encourage my PH to let fly after the initial shot.

I can also relate to a previous poster about keeping a moose from making it to the thick stuff or water, or dropping a goat in a recoverable spot. I also lost an elk one time to a poor shot because the friends I was hunting with didn't know if I wanted them to back me up or not. It was the first time hunting with them and we had never thought to discuss it.

[catnthehat]

Yeah i know how it turned out my question is around the legalities? So basically hunter A could take it or leave it? Seemed like more of a moral decision in this case.

He could have legally taken it, but the fact that it had a bullet hole in it would probably raise a lot of questions at the local F&W office, and any horn scoring competitions, and of course, he was after a book animal so that discounted this particular ram.
However, if it were me, would have told that guy with the rifle it was his ram, even if he offered it to me, but not because of legalities, because of my personal ethics, be they are they are.
Cat

[bdub]

He could have legally taken it, but the fact that it had a bullet hole in it would probably raise a lot of questions at the local F&W office, and any horn scoring competitions, and of course, he was after a book animal so that discounted this particular ram.
However, if it were me, would have told that guy with the rifle it was his ram, even if he offered it to me, but not because of legalities, because of my personal ethics, be they are they are.
Cat

I would agree in this case. Ethically and any other way I look at it was clearly the rifle hunters ram.

[elkhunter11]

Yeah i know how it turned out my question is around the legalities? So basically hunter A could take it or leave it? Seemed like more of a moral decision in this case.

I am unaware of any regulation that states that the animal legally belongs to the first person that puts a bullet or an arrow into the animal.

If someone can find some actual regulation that states this, please post it.

[Speckle55]

I would agree in this case. Ethically and any other way I look at it was clearly the rifle hunters ram.

Agree

David:)

[pikeslayer22]

I am unaware of any regulation that states that the animal legally belongs to the first person that puts a bullet or an arrow into the animal.

If someone can find some actual regulation that states this, please post it.
There must be some written rule...what would have happened if they both claimed it?

[catnthehat]

There must be some written rule...what would have happened if they both claimed it?

Nope, no written law, there is law about tagging an animal, that's it.
The law does not take into account "what if" scenarios, and that is where oftentimes one's ethics will come into play, be they good or bad!

Cat

[Ranch11]

I never liked it.

I find guys that say they will take "2nd shot" really just want to shoot your animal for you.

X2.

[H380]

My group gets around this whole problem of a back up shot because we have agreed that who ever shoots the animal tags it .. First shot , second or whatever .. If you aren't the one with a tag then you don't shoot ... problem solved .

[KegRiver]

I am unaware of any regulation that states that the animal legally belongs to the first person that puts a bullet or an arrow into the animal.

If someone can find some actual regulation that states this, please post it.

I gather that it is not stipulated, rather any charges that may have been laid were based on the definition of hunting.

Lets see if I can clarify what I mean. I'm really not good at this, but I'll try.
Charges are laid when you don't have an appropriate tag, the argument being, that if you shot it, you were hunting it, without a license, and thus, if you killed it, it is your animal.

That is sort of how it was told to me.
Years ago I was planning on taking my nephew hunting for his first Moose.
Just to be on the safe side I ask the local F&W officer if I could pack a gun, to back him up, since he wasn't an experienced hunter.

I was told that I could if I had the appropriate tag, and if I fired the killing shot I would have to tag the animal.

I studied the regs to see if I could find a clearer explanation of this but was unable to find anything specific.

I have no problem with backing a person up, where legal, but I can't feel comfortable about tagging someone elses animal.
To me, if they started the hunt, it's their animal. Or at least it is until they give up on it.

That's nothing to do with the law, just my personal preference.

[Kick1]

There must be some written rule...what would have happened if they both claimed it?

Pretty sure in 2009, 2 friends both shot the same ram, a 197" ram. I'm not 100% sure if this was tagged by both Hunter's, but both did have a tag for sheep.
As far as Archie's ram I was their and definately a crappy situation for sure. I won't go through the hole story( you can find it here in the forum). Archie came down to us and the rams, he told us he could not claim because of the bullet. He put out his arm shook my friends hand and congradulated him on the ram. I know he was very upset(as anyone of us would be) and no.... my friend would have never shot at this ram if either of us new what had happened just minutes before.
As per the OP question...both have tags for animal their hunting and agreed before then that is up to the people involved.