tags and unrecovered game

[alfoldivandor]

My personal law is if I am sure that I hit the animal and did not completely miss

I vill try to recover for Day or two dependent of the situation if I will not find it I will consider the tag is filled for that year (bear )
I will still stay in the camp and help other to succeed , but I will not use my gun just in self defence ...

Is their a law that says if you wound an animal and don't recover it your tag is considered used?

I have never checked personally, but everyone I have ever hunted with has always insisted this was the case.

I only ask as I was channel surfing yesterday and this show called the "bone yard" was on wild TV and my attention was drawn as I flipped to the channel a fairly attractive women in a black corset was throwing knives . . . turns out this gimmic worked and I watched the remainder of the episode. The host was moose hunting in Alberta. At one point he shoots a moose with his bow. Very evident by the footage it was a bad shot. Very high above the lungs. You don't see the moose go down and then the show starts again and the guy says they looked for blood and gave up after 2 hours. That in itself peed me off, however the guy is back at it again moose hunting. Ends up getting a small bull with his gun.

I don't know what the law in Alberta is, but I was wondering what it is in Ontario.

[Fox]

So I ask the question again.....where do you believe this statement is written?

Sorry, been throwing up for two days, calm down.

When I first started hunting I thought I had read in the migratory bird regulations that any cripples were to be included in your daily bag limit, now it seems to be written that any cripples found are to be killed and included in your bag limit, so it may have changed of been read wrong.

As to Snowwalkers comment, that is the dumbest thing I have ever seen, because you shot at the animal did not mean you hit it, if you shot at it went down then took off running and you did not recover it then that would be considered a cripple to be included.

[krakadawn]

[QUOTE=Fox;1049418]Sorry, been throwing up for two days, calm down.

"When I first started hunting I thought I had read in the migratory bird regulations that any cripples were to be included in your daily bag limit, now it seems to be written that any cripples found are to be killed and included in your bag limit, so it may have changed of been read wrong."


Sorry to hear that you've been sick, I just got rid of it and I'm pretty calm.

I don't recall any mention ever about cripples being included in your daily bag limit.Here's the current section:


Retrieving Birds

16 (1) No person shall hunt a migratory bird unless he has adequate means for retrieving any such bird that he may kill, cripple or injure.


(1.1) A person who kills, cripples or injures a migratory bird shall

(a) immediately make every reasonable effort to retrieve the bird; and


(b) if he retrieves the bird while it is still alive, immediately kill and include it in his daily bag limit.



(2) Notwithstanding paragraph 15(1)(e), a power boat may be used for the purpose of retrieving a migratory bird.


SOR/79-544, s. 8;
SOR/82-703, s. 6;
SOR/83-594, s. 1;
SOR/2000-331, s. 3.


It's been the same over the years(too many) that I can recall.

[Snowwalker]

I remember it was a law like this in Alaska that got uncle Ted in some hot water years ago. Draw blood, your tag is used. I can see why some outfitters would use this policy.

As I recall it was a law that was found by someone many months after his hunt. He was then charged. The Guides and CO in Alaska did NOT know about it till then.

[Snowwalker]

Sorry, been throwing up for two days, calm down.

When I first started hunting I thought I had read in the migratory bird regulations that any cripples were to be included in your daily bag limit, now it seems to be written that any cripples found are to be killed and included in your bag limit, so it may have changed of been read wrong.

As to Snowwalkers comment, that is the dumbest thing I have ever seen, because you shot at the animal did not mean you hit it, if you shot at it went down then took off running and you did not recover it then that would be considered a cripple to be included.

You made a pretty broad statement. Just asked how far your definition of having to count it goes.

[trimmer21]

Ok, so an outfitter sets up baits and stands for clients, a couple of a**holes come in and wound game all week until they harvest something, what do you think any of the other clients or outfitters in the area will have to say about that, what do you think is going to happen to the management of game in his area?

And you aint huntin at any of the outfitters that have any kind of ethics

Really? I'm not calling BS,but,It's hard to imagine that happening. No doubt,outfitters have remedies for such an eventuality,but,they have no authority to cancel someone's tag. Outfitters I know take measures to ensure the marksmanship of each client before the hunt to minimize the chances of that happening,usually,at their own range to ensure rifles are still "zeroed" after travel.

[bdog]

Well it's happening a lot more than most people are aware of, and yes these outfitters have a range, gun/archery, test your equipment, but if you draw blood your hunt is over with these outfitters, they will do everything possible to help in the recovery, but if the game cant be found, the hunt is over

[Sam Menard]

IMO, burning your tag on a wounded animal is an ethical thing to do. Just because you don't recover the animal, doesn't mean that it didn’t die at some point afterwards due to its wound. A bullet wound, no matter where, is nasty and very prone to infection. The main reason an outfitter may dictate that an un-retrieved animal is a burned tag is the fact that many die a slow death. Burning the tag limits the kill and ensures he has sufficient numbers if animals to run his business.

[Deer Wrastler]

IMO, burning your tag on a wounded animal is an ethical thing to do. Just because you don't recover the animal, doesn't mean that it didn’t die at some point afterwards due to its wound. A bullet wound, no matter where, is nasty and very prone to infection. The main reason an outfitter may dictate that an un-retrieved animal is a burned tag is the fact that many die a slow death. Burning the tag limits the kill and ensures he has sufficient numbers if animals to run his business.

Im of the understanding if the government agreed on this being ethical or not they would make it a law. They are well aware animals get wounded and could die without having a tag placed on them.

Why be any harder on yourself then the government is...practice often and be sure of your shots...if crap happens oh well Im not disqualifying myself because a perfectly legal and understandable mistake happened. To each their own I guess, outfitters that have that rule will simply loose out on my potential business no hard feeling either way they can do what they want even if that means running themselves out of the business. It may be to prevent amateurs from going out wounding animals all over but the majority of us practice our shots and can hit wherever needed with much confidence and skill.

If I was chosing between 2 similar outfitters and the only difference was this dumb rule well the choice would be very easy for me. No way in hell am I paying 1200+ for a guided hunt and a mistake happens and they kick me out/disqualify me because of something out of my control happens. Crap happens all the time and that rule is just a punishment meant for lousy shots however grouping excellent shooters into the same pool and punishing all alike is a poor business decision IMO.

[Deer Wrastler]

Note to self: Never hunt with outfitters with an a**hole attitude like that. That's nuts.

totally agree...lol next scam out there will be they screw with your sights when your not looking so you make a bad hit and they kick you out and keep your cash haha! kinda reminds me of this:

https://youtu.be/TGwZVGKG30s

...last year a guide was charged with misleading his client who shot a record bull moose to believe they could not recover the animal...later on the guide was attempting to sell the rack for some crazy amount of money and got busted...so although pretty far fetched I would hope nobody uses this rule as a way to scam clients because although not very probable its definately plausible.