#3 Using a Dog to Track Wounded Game

[300magman]

Originally Posted by deerguy

I am all for using dogs to track wound game.

Me as well. Ive seen dogs in action tracking wounded game before abroad, and have witnessed a time where it would be useful here in aberta with a poorly placed shot by an acquaintance. I understand all points as to why it is illegal, but I still see merit in allowing it. Truth be told, if I had a mutt capable of performing the task and a situation arose where it was needed, I would have no problem "breaking the law" and using the dog to find the animal for myself or someone else.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Ontario just brought in a reg that allows tracking wounded game with a dog basically you hire a dog handler to assist you finding your game.

My Dads buddy called in a dog to find his muzzle loader buck, it took a while but they recovered it.

I know the dog remains leashed but I am unaware of the other regs Ontario has surrounding the use of tracking dogs.

LC

[Talking moose]

Question is.... Would the dogs recover more wounded/lost game, or would the dogs be used to take game illegally? If the recovery is greater than the poaching, that alone makes it worth while. So do the benifits outweigh the cons? I think so. One person with a trained dog can help many people recover, where as one poacher with a trained dog will only use it for himself.

[gitrdun]

2 years ago, in a heavily wooded area, my Beagle tracked down a WT doe inside of 5 minutes that could not be tracked by a couple of 2 legged creatures in a span of 2 hours with darkness fast closing in. The shot was decent, but the deer didn't want to expire. Which law was broken? using a dog to track an animal? or was it letting an animal spoil? Either way, a dead deer was retrieved and did not go to waste. I was fully prepared to deal with consequences once I unleashed that most incredible nose. And I'm not ashamed to say that the so-so shot was my own.

[gitrdun]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Question is.... Would the dogs recover more wounded/lost game, or would the dogs be used to take game illegally? If the recovery is greater than the poaching, that alone makes it worth while. So do the benifits outweigh the cons? I think so. One person with a trained dog can help many people recover, where as one poacher with a trained dog will only use it for himself.

Darn rights Talking moose. Unfortunately, some people abuse every loop hole.

[Battle Rat]

Originally Posted by Dick284

Gee Ninja.
What part of it will be abused, and is too hard to enforce, are you not following.

The argument about choosing your shots, and honing your bushcraft can also be made to counter the argument for tracking dogs.

At any rate, dream on, dreamer.

Has abuse been found to be a problem in other provinces and territories that allow dogs for tracking or packing?

[Redfrog]

Originally Posted by Battle Rat

Has abuse been found to be a problem in other provinces and territories that allow dogs for tracking or packing?

I've never heard or seen of it being an issue or abused. In some jurisdictions where dogs run game on their own they are simply shot, but I don't think it is a big issue. after over 50 years in places with dog hunting being legal. I've never heard of one problem.

[lead chucker]

It sure would be nice to have the lab with me for company when up hunting sheep...it's ****ed me off that it illegal. .

[gitrdun]

Originally Posted by lead chucker

It sure would be nice to have the lab with me for company when up hunting sheep...it's ****ed me off that it illegal. .

A Lab?....great dogs, but hounds rule.

[Battle Rat]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

I've never heard or seen of it being an issue or abused. In some jurisdictions where dogs run game on their own they are simply shot, but I don't think it is a big issue. after over 50 years in places with dog hunting being legal. I've never heard of one problem.

Nor have I.
It's just an assumption he pulled out of his hand warmer.

[waterninja]

Originally Posted by Dick284

It's that way, because it would be abused, and we'd have guys running game with dogs.
Enforcement is nearly impossible, and a conviction would be very difficult.

Heck we can't use pack dogs while hunting, and now your confused about tracking dogs........ This one is so low on any priority scale it needs ground penetrating radar to get a ping.

Try worrying about:
Funding for ungulate counts.
Funding for enforcement.
Resident first opportunities.
Heightened residency requirements.
Increased access, and habitat development.


You are so on the outside looking in.

Dick you have an impressive list there but most of the list would require some pretty big policy changes and lengthy, costly consultations. I'm not trying to rewrite policy, but just trying to make things a little easier and less complicated out in the field.

[jwilson]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Tell that to the officer that warned one of the guys that I shoot skeet with, when he had his dog in the truck while he was out hunting big game. The officer made it clear to him that since he was looking for big game as he was driving, he was in fact hunting big game. He was given a warning, and told to leave the dog at home when he went big game hunting again.

I actually wanted to take my dog along when I draw my pronghorn tag, so that I could hunt Hungarian partridge that I often encounter while hunting pronghorn, but I don't need the aggravation of being charged for having the dog with me while hunting big game.

Just to clarify this, I have sent an e-mail to AEP for clarification. If I can get someone from AEP to state that it is legal, and put their name to it, my dog will be accompanying me next fall.

That is total bull... I'd tell the officer to pound sand. You mean to tell me that if I have my dog in my truck while looking for elk that I intend to use that dog for big game hunting purposes?? That'd be like rcmp pulling a guy over and issuing a distracted driving warning cause his cellphone was sitting in the cup holder lol.

[IronNoggin]

Originally Posted by Battle Rat

Has abuse been found to be a problem in other provinces and territories that allow dogs for tracking or packing?

I have not heard of even a single issue of "abuse" in BC over the 20 years we have lived here.

I HAVE heard of literally dozens upon dozens of animals recovered in that same time period, most of which would likely not have been if it were not for the dog involved.

Cheers,
Nog

[waterninja]

Originally Posted by IronNoggin

I have not heard of even a single issue of "abuse" in BC over the 20 years we have lived here.

I HAVE heard of literally dozens upon dozens of animals recovered in that same time period, most of which would likely not have been if it were not for the dog involved.

Cheers,
Nog

You are so naive Iron. Haven't you twigged it yet? Here in AB you don't have to have an actual incident to have a serious problem. Rumor and hypebole is all you need. Just think of the Suffield Elk cull. Don't you recall all the mayhem and bloodshed that was about to happen at any moment with all those lunatic hunters gathered there all at once. We have roadhunters shooting up farmyards and livestock nonstop from the Sask. to BC border. We have anglers fishing our lakes dry and catching every Tiger Trout that was ever released because it is a voluntary release program instead of compulsary. OMG the horrors we put up with every day.
Or maybe we just have a bunch of drama queens who need attention?

[Battle Rat]

Originally Posted by IronNoggin

I have not heard of even a single issue of "abuse" in BC over the 20 years we have lived here.

I HAVE heard of literally dozens upon dozens of animals recovered in that same time period, most of which would likely not have been if it were not for the dog involved.

Cheers,
Nog

It would have been a benefit here in Alberta this year with the lack of snow in early November or any archery season for that matter.
Stuff can happen to the best of us at times.

[MathewsArcher]

Not without some merit if implemented correctly.

[IronNoggin]

Originally Posted by waterninja

... Or maybe we just have a bunch of drama queens who need attention?

Not completely naive there Ninja. I have in fact noticed that this Forum could easily give one of our main BC hunting forums a Great Run For The Money in that respect!

Originally Posted by Battle Rat

It would have been a benefit here in Alberta this year with the lack of snow in early November or any archery season for that matter.

My experience (and that of many others) is exactly that. Most that hunt can usually track somewhat efficiently when there is snow on the ground. Without that, the success rate plummets right into the sewer for far too many.

Of the canine recoveries I have been involved with (and those I know personally of) the vast majority are under the conditions you describe. Coincidentally, the majority have also been in archery seasons...

Cheers,
Nog

[Andrzej]

I've hunted in Poland and it was mandatory for hunting Association that had Red Deer or Moose in their hunting area to have access to tracking dogs.
Mostly Hanoverian or Bavarian Bloodhunds were used.
My own Drahthaar was trained for tracking any wounded game including Roe Deer, Hare, birds.

I trained and used Jagdterrier ( German Hunting Terrier)to hunt and track Wild Boar as they were more specialized then my Pointer for this work.

As for DDrahthaar testing there are a few options for tracking large game.

There is link to full test requirements:
http://www.deutschdrahthaar.com/bree...chsprufung-vgp
There is tracking:
Test 8 – Reimenarbeit (Tagfurte) (Blood track – laid same day)

This is the normal blood track option (worth less points than if the handler has opted for the overnight blood track, where it is laid the day before).

The dog is placed in a down near the start of a blood track (laid several hours earlier) whilst the judge explains the general direction of the start of the track. The handler then places the mandatory special track collar on the dog and long lead (usually 10 m or so).

The handler sets the dog off on the track and the dog is expected to use the full length of the lead and lead the handler through the woods. The other competitors and all the judges follow. If the dog stops and investigates areas where the game has left a wound bed then the handler indicates this. Eventually the dog must find the game (usually a deer) to be successful. The dog is left near the deer and handler and judges retreat and hid out of sight for a short while.

The dog should remain in a down near the game and not make any attempt to pick up or eat the game. This test was a joy to watch, with all dogs taking us through the twists and turns of the track for over 400m. Even better, one of our group had opted for the option to grade as a Totverweiser (worth extra points).
Additional Totverweisen option (Blood Track with Bringsel)

This test follows the same pattern as the test above but the track ends at a second wound bed. The judges then instruct the handler to go to a point with the dog where they cannot see. One of the judges then lays a fresh blood track for 200m to a dead deer.

The handler is shown the start of the track and releases the dog with a special ‘bringsel’ on its collar (usually made of horn or leather). The dog follows the track alone and the handler remains. The dog, on locating the game flicks the bringsel into its mouth and returns to the handler. The handler then have previously explained to the judge how he will know that the dog has found the deer and having decided it has located the deer, follows the dog. The dog runs from handler to the deer and back, encouraging the handler to follow and eventually leads the handler to the deer and the exercise is complete. Again the dog is left at the game and observed to ensure it will not attempt to chew at or eat the game.

Another variant of this test exists where the dog remains with the deer on locating it and bays to call the handler, rather than returning to the handler. This technique, known as Totverbellen, is very hard, the dog expected to call constantly for 10-20 minutes. None of the dogs on our day had applied for this variant.

At the end of every track, the handler is awarded a couple of small sprigs, usually of an oak tree – one for his hat and one for his dogs collar. It is so typical of the German pride for hunting and tradition that makes the event so special.

[densa44]

As the fellow with the German trained dogs has pointed out this is a skill that they test for, and Elk's dog and mine (GWP and PP) are tested in the same system.

I don't hunt big game but I am out there hunting birds when other people are hunting big game. It has been mentioned that there are "dog handlers" who track wounded game for hunters. In the states and Europe this is true for sure.

I don't think it would be such a stretch to help someone find a deer that they had shot with my dogs. I'm tracking,not hunting. We run tests in Canada and in Alberta where the dogs are tested for that ability, handlers train their dogs to blood track right here in Alberta.

If I was hunting pheasants and one of you asked politely if my dog could help find your deer so that it wasn't lost, I'd probably do it.

[2 Tollers]

Using a dog on a long line to track wounded game or as a pack dog in the back country are changes that should be considered. I am not sure if these made it through as recommendations from AFGA a few years back but I recall discussions on both of these points.

[waterninja]

Originally Posted by densa44

As the fellow with the German trained dogs has pointed out this is a skill that they test for, and Elk's dog and mine (GWP and PP) are tested in the same system.

I don't hunt big game but I am out there hunting birds when other people are hunting big game. It has been mentioned that there are "dog handlers" who track wounded game for hunters. In the states and Europe this is true for sure.

I don't think it would be such a stretch to help someone find a deer that they had shot with my dogs. I'm tracking,not hunting. We run tests in Canada and in Alberta where the dogs are tested for that ability, handlers train their dogs to blood track right here in Alberta.

If I was hunting pheasants and one of you asked politely if my dog could help find your deer so that it wasn't lost, I'd probably do it.

So you would break the law and perhaps face a stiff fine and loss of hunting privelages if someone asked you politely? I know it sounds silly, but thats the way the law is now. Tracking and retrieving a wounded big game animal is still considered hunting. But hey, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by waterninja

So you would break the law and perhaps face a stiff fine and loss of hunting privelages if someone asked you politely? I know it sounds silly, but thats the way the law is now. Tracking and retrieving a wounded big game animal is still considered hunting. But hey, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Hd likely would if the alternative is a lost animal .
There are times when people knowingly break a law under certain circumstances to make z bad situation s not better .
Not that I am condoning it , but looking at it on a realistic frame of mind.
Cat

[waterninja]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Hd likely would if the alternative is a lost animal .
There are times when people knowingly break a law under certain circumstances to make z bad situation s not better .
Not that I am condoning it , but looking at it on a realistic frame of mind.
Cat

CAT!!!! WHY, WHY, WHY? Of course what you say makes sense, and of course it seems more ethical then not trying to find it with a dog, BUT...... You are breaking the law!!. Even worse you are knowingly breaking the law. I got the feeling that Densa did not know that tracking that deer was against the law. I don't think he would do it now that he does know. My idea is to try and change this law, not break it. If everybody broke the law whenever they thought it would be ok to do so, then whats the point of having any? I can see now why I'm meeting such resistance in suggesting changes in our regs.
Cat, I have always respected your view on things but this time I have to disagree with you ( though I understand where your coming from, the law can be an ass.)

[Andrzej]

Originally Posted by densa44

If I was hunting pheasants and one of you asked politely if my dog could help find your deer so that it wasn't lost, I'd probably do it.

Waterninja
Read this statment again...He is hunting upland with shotgun. His dog finds dead deer. What you are going to charge him with ???

"The Law is the Law is the Law"....Eastern Europe still would be behind Iron Curtain if all would think this way over there.
If is stupid law as this one we should unite to change it.
O!!! Sunday hunting is legal now WOW.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by waterninja

CAT!!!! WHY, WHY, WHY? Of course what you say makes sense, and of course it seems more ethical then not trying to find it with a dog, BUT...... You are breaking the law!!. Even worse you are knowingly breaking the law. I got the feeling that Densa did not know that tracking that deer was against the law. I don't think he would do it now that he does know. My idea is to try and change this law, not break it. If everybody broke the law whenever they thought it would be ok to do so, then whats the point of having any? I can see now why I'm meeting such resistance in suggesting changes in our regs.
Cat, I have always respected your view on things but this time I have to disagree with you ( though I understand where your coming from, the law can be an ass.)

Why? Simple- for the and reason. I have shot wounded animals hit by vehicles in February, and bears in town limits and a park that were endangering human lives
Because at the time even though it was illegal it was the right thing To do.
There is a limit to which even I will obey the law, but if I am charged , I will stand up and take the big like a man in court , explain why and plead guilty.
However That does not mean I am going to automatically track a deer down for every Tom Dick and Harry that make a lousy shot because they see someone with a fog that they think will track a gut shot deer for them

[IR_mike]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Why? Simple- for the and reason. I have shot wounded animals hit by vehicles in February, and bears in town limits and a park that were endangering human lives
Because at the time even though it was illegal it was the right thing To do.
There is a limit to which even I will obey the law, but if I am charged , I will stand up and take the big like a man in court , explain why and plead guilty.
However That does not mean I am going to automatically track a deer down for every Tom Dick and Harry that make a lousy shot because they see someone with a fog that they think will track a gut shot deer for them

I pretty much agree with whatever cat posts.

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Why? Simple- for the and reason. I have shot wounded animals hit by vehicles in February, and bears in town limits and a park that were endangering human lives
Because at the time even though it was illegal it was the right thing To do.
There is a limit to which even I will obey the law, but if I am charged , I will stand up and take the big like a man in court , explain why and plead guilty.
However That does not mean I am going to automatically track a deer down for every Tom Dick and Harry that make a lousy shot because they see someone with a fog that they think will track a gut shot deer for them

Right is right, wrong is wrong. Does a guy follow the law if it's wrong? Does a guy break the law if it's the right thing to do? I'm with Cat on this one. Let's a guy sleep better at night knowing he broke the law but did the right thing vs. Following the law and knowing you could of did the right thing. Just because it's a law doesn't always make it right.

[LKILR]

Maybe some of us need to practice making better shots or not shooting at all. I have been hunting for 30 years and I have only lost two big game animals that I wounded. If people are allowed to use dogs to track they might be tempted to take any shot knowing the dog can finish the job for them. It's just another excuse for a hunter to pull the trigger.

[densa44]

The only way to be sure is to see if Fish and wildlife would prosecute a senior citizen who has never shot a deer in his life and just helped a fellow hunter find a dead dear.

The Judge would have to agree that finding a dead deer that I didn't shoot was hunting. He or she may not.

The fact that we would be "wasting game" also illegal and worse in my mind and that the hunter could keep shooting deer until he found one would also be a consideration.

BTW I wouldn't plead guilty, not guilty because I'm not hunting and then see what the court says.

Another point, if you are the civil servant that places a charge like this and you lose, you may find that you are deemed surplus by your employer.

Is cement bench still here, He's a lawyer?

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by LKILR

Maybe some of us need to practice making better shots or not shooting at all. I have been hunting for 30 years and I have only lost two big game animals that I wounded. If people are allowed to use dogs to track they might be tempted to take any shot knowing the dog can finish the job for them. It's just another excuse for a hunter to pull the trigger.

I don' t believe that people will tend to take more questionable shots just because they can use s dog to track an , animals can still go a very long way if hit in a place that is not hit well .

I do agree that people need yo make the best shot possible and to practise diligently however .
The people I know that run deer , bear, and coyotes with hounds are very good shots but practise as regularly as most others o know.
Cat