Who get's the rack?

[duckduckgoose]

I agree with the sentiment of if you didn't shoot it, why would you want it? In the case of a hunt camp or a gimmicky restaurant you might want a few antlers hanging around for whimsy, so if the shooter doesn't want it, then I guess it doesn't hurt to donate to that.
In the case of more than one person shooting the same deer, I've always gone with the first person to hit the deer gets the rack because he likely slowed it down so it could be tracked or shot by another hunter.

[Bushmoose]

I see the general consensus is the shooter gets it. My sentiments exactly! The reason I asked is because I was invited to a hunt down in the Morrisburg area and that is one of the questions I asked. Apparently with this group, the camp gets the rack? I declined the offer for other reasons, but it left a bad taste with me? I suppose if a person knows this rule ahead of time, then have at it, but not on my watch!

[arclight]

With my group, the shooter gets the rack. Or in the case of bear or fur-bearing animals the fur.

[oldbill]

I would say shooter gets the rack or it stays at the camp if it's a group effort.

As for anonymous racks from the dump, garage sales or auctions, I've picked up a few. I've got a sheep mount, a caribou rack and a raven. I also have my father in laws 30" pike that is probably 40 years old. I've also got a massive muskox skull my brother found on the tundra and walked for miles to get. I've got a few nice old framed photos of hunts from days gone by. I don't claim them as my own, nor do I boast about them. I think they are amazing. They are someone's hunt. Someone's memories. I would love it if some guy or girl picked one of my trophies years from now and stuck it on his mantle. I think it's a little sad to see them forgotten. That said, I'd much rather be out making my own.

[B Wilson]

We often cut the racks up and let the dogs enjoy chewing on them for weeks

[35wailin]

Where things get dicey is when the buck is hit by one guy first, then downed by another guy a little further on. I've seen this happen in my old camp. Hunters not too far apart, the hounds bring one in close and the deer runs down the line and is shot at by more than one guy.

This happened to us. My buddy shot a small 6 last year. I ended up killing it, but I wouldn't even think of claiming the rack. I know I didn't hit it first, so it's doesn't belong to me.

[johny]

Where things get dicey is when the buck is hit by one guy first, then downed by another guy a little further on. I've seen this happen in my old camp. Hunters not too far apart, the hounds bring one in close and the deer runs down the line and is shot at by more than one guy.

I know I'll be run down for this comment.
But wounding deer run by dogs is despicable.
Just because another guy manages to finish off your bad shooting does not make it a good hunt.
How often do you shoot and fail to retrieve with hounds?

[werner.reiche]

I know I'll be run down for this comment.
But wounding deer run by dogs is despicable.
Just because another guy manages to finish off your bad shooting does not make it a good hunt.
How often do you shoot and fail to retrieve with hounds?

"I know I'll be run down for this comment."

...and so you should be because its pretty stupid.

Is wounding deer run by dogs more "despicable" than wounding deer not run by hounds?

The dogs I've hunted with pick up deer wounded by other (non hound) hunters who can't find them.
It doesn't take much of a wound on a deer and the hounds will hold it in one spot and you can walk up and shoot it. Done that several times. The odds of retrieving a wounded deer while hunting with hounds is significantly higher than without hounds, particularly where the deer is wounded lightly enough it isn't going to die in 24 hours.

[Fox]

I know I'll be run down for this comment.
But wounding deer run by dogs is despicable.
Just because another guy manages to finish off your bad shooting does not make it a good hunt.
How often do you shoot and fail to retrieve with hounds?

Really?

Please just stop, you obviously have no clue, hunting with hounds is an Ontario tradition that goes back to way before you were ever around. Deer in the big bush are moved by dogs and run to block lines where they are taken year after year by competent shooters. Most deer are not shot on the run, most deer come out walking, trotting or sneaking to get around, the dogs are generally a long way back from the deer, it is no different than using dogs for upland game.

Lots of these deer are hit with perfect shots in the heart or lungs but continue to run as deer do not always drop, they actually rarely drop at the shot, even from a 30-06, which seems to be the go to gun for one upping others when it comes to deer hunting.

Please refrain for comments born out of naivety.

[bushman]

"I know I'll be run down for this comment."

...and so you should be because its pretty stupid.

Is wounding deer run by dogs more "despicable" than wounding deer not run by hounds?

The dogs I've hunted with pick up deer wounded by other (non hound) hunters who can't find them.
It doesn't take much of a wound on a deer and the hounds will hold it in one spot and you can walk up and shoot it. Done that several times. The odds of retrieving a wounded deer while hunting with hounds is significantly higher than without hounds, particularly where the deer is wounded lightly enough it isn't going to die in 24 hours.

Well said Werner. I have done and seen the same things over the years.

A rifle hunter shouldn't condemn a bow hunter, non dog hunters shouldn't condemn those that choose to use dogs, etcetera and so on!!

As I have said before, as long as its fair chase and legal, live and let live, each to their own. We are all in this together!! We shouldn't be taking jabs at one another just because of differing styles of hunting ,imho.