Letting them lie

[sndmn11]

There seem to be far more "perfect" shots that result in unrecovered animals, than fair shots that result in recovery. @Scoot and @Macintosh probably mentioned the reason for that.

I won't understand people who shoot and then don't go to where the animal was for hours. I am at that spot as soon as I can walk there and hunting immediately after that. There is either a dead animal, a wounded animal, or a safe and healthy animal involved and my perspective is that time erodes both physical and memory evidence.

If you are trailing an animal that is healthy enough to evade your pursuit, it probably isn't dying anytime soon. If you are trailing an animal that is mortally wounded, go be a hunter and kill the thing.

 

[Macintosh]

... I would like to ...put forward that if you are leaving your game overnight, that you as a hunter have come across a very poor set of circumstances due to poor decision(s) or poor skills or, on the off chance, some very poor luck.

Letting one lay overnight should not be the default that it has come to be, but a last ditch effort.






*Soap box is available now, stepping down.

Read my book above. Sorry, its a lot of words I know, but it's hardly sufficient punishment for writing stuff like this. Put yourself in my shoes--38 degrees, not a coyote in sight, it's 8pm and the blood trail that was initially pink and frothy has become a pinprick of blood every 15 yards, and now, 250 yards later you have a decision to make. Maybe you hit a few inches back from where you thought, maybe the deer jumped the string, regardless, clearly the hit isnt what you thought it was. You have the skill to follow pinpricks every 15 yards all night if you want...given the low cost of waiting overnight (remember, its 38 degrees out and there arent many coyotes around) is staying on the trail the course of action that results in the highest probability of recovering that animal? Or is this simply "poor decisions and poor skills"?
For what its worth I ate every ounce of that deer and it was yummy as heck. I'd make the same decision again, but earlier, given the need.

 

[MallardSX2]

I agree. Unless a deer is gut shot, I trail immediately and try to get another arrow/bullet in it. You can't leave deer overnight where I live or 99% of the time there will be nothing left of them in a few hours.

There seem to be far more "perfect" shots that result in unrecovered animals, than fair shots that result in recovery. @Scoot and @Macintosh probably mentioned the reason for that.

I won't understand people who shoot and then don't go to where the animal was for hours. I am at that spot as soon as I can walk there and hunting immediately after that. There is either a dead animal, a wounded animal, or a safe and healthy animal involved and my perspective is that time erodes both physical and memory evidence.

If you are trailing an animal that is healthy enough to evade your pursuit, it probably isn't dying anytime soon. If you are trailing an animal that is mortally wounded, go be a hunter and kill the thing.

 

[Macintosh]

@sndmn11 I dont think its quite that simple. A gut shot deer holes up in brush and will die in 4-8 hours. but if you bump it it WILL run--without a blood trail at all in many cases--for a long way, far enough that in thick eastern woods and brush you would as often as not never find it. A tracking dog might, but that's not even legal in some states. Plus you deal with eastern-sized properties and posted land. It could be the right decision in some circumstances, just that those situations arent universal, that's all.

 

[molliesmaster]

Read my book above. Sorry, its a lot of words I know, but it's hardly sufficient punishment for writing stuff like this. Put yourself in my shoes--38 degrees, not a coyote in sight, it's 8pm and the blood trail that was initially pink and frothy has become a pinprick of blood every 15 yards, and now, 250 yards later you have a decision to make. Maybe you hit a few inches back from where you thought, maybe the deer jumped the string, regardless, clearly the hit isnt what you thought it was. You have the skill to follow pinpricks every 15 yards all night if you want...given the low cost of waiting overnight (remember, its 38 degrees out and there arent many coyotes around) is staying on the trail the course of action that results in the highest probability of recovering that animal? Or is this simply "poor decisions and poor skills"?
For what its worth I ate every ounce of that deer and it was yummy as heck. I'd make the same decision again, but earlier, given the need.

Is your scenario above an outlier or the norm?

IF it has become your normal to have poor blood trails and/or long tracks, I would say that you should look at your equipment, abilities, and the anatomy of the game you hunt.


IF it's not the norm, then I believe I have made allowances for that in every post I have made on the subject. I get that it happens. I really do. I just hate that it seems to be the normal now to "back out" and find him tomorrow. I'm not talking about the one-off where you didn't hit perfect and the blood just isn't there to track and you've got a nice cold front coming in. I'm talking about the default, the normal, the 9 times out of 10.

 

[KHNC]

I'd also add afraid of the dark to the list. I'm shocked how scared of the dark people seem.

Only in Grizz country, especially when ive already seen multiple grizz that day.

 

[Macintosh]

@molliesmaster no, 9 times out of 10 the deer is piled up within 100 yards. I dont disagree with that. What I disagree with is 2 things--1) that backing out has become the norm. I just dont see that. (However, with the interweb we hear about that 10% more than we used to. And after hunting long enough its the arare hunter that wont encounter it at some point). and 2) that backing out in a case where not everything adds up to a good shot is a failing. It might be in a place where it's always 70degree nighttime lows and there are packs of coyotes around every oak tree, I'm not disputing that. My point is simply that for a lot of people in a lot of cases the likely cost of waiting overnight is quite low or nil, and therefore it's not necessarily a dumb course of action to take if you are worried about a bad hit. I dont at all mean to suggest it should be the "default setting", I just dont think it makes any sense to cast it in a bad light without adding those caveats of meat spoilage, etc.

 

[molliesmaster]

Only in Grizz country, especially when ive already seen multiple grizz that day.

I'd be afraid then, too. Probably be out of clean pants also.

 

[stoopiddumbman]

I'd also add afraid of the dark to the list. I'm shocked how scared of the dark people seem.

This is it totally. Just go to Youtube or check out the threads on here of guys scared to camp overnight in Colorado.

 

[sndmn11]

@sndmn11 I dont think its quite that simple. A gut shot deer holes up in brush and will die in 4-8 hours. but if you bump it it WILL run--without a blood trail at all in many cases--for a long way, far enough that in thick eastern woods and brush you would as often as not never find it. A tracking dog might, but that's not even legal in some states. Plus you deal with eastern-sized properities and posted land.

It's not an absolute, read the sign.

My position is that I am hunting to a conclusion. If I run across a scenario where that conclusion is the animal is gut-shot but unreachable, then so be it. Part of me getting to that conclusion is figuring out where that animal is. Where are the escape routes, can I get high and see what it is I need to see, can I narrow the animal down to 1 acre, etc. I don't foresee myself saying, "I need to leave this animal to die" unless that is my last resort, and there's a really good chance I am staying out in the field with the hope of not being woke by coyotes.

My opinion is that there should be a minuscule amount of scenarios where time is being relied on to kill an animal. If a hunter thinks he has the skill to track and kill a healthy animal, my opinion is that he shouldn't be afraid to do so with one that he has already put at a disadvantage by wounding.

 

[stoopiddumbman]

Only in Grizz country, especially when ive already seen multiple grizz that day.

The problem there is if you leave it overnight then the bear is there waiting for you in the morning. Better to go find them right away but you won't be walking right the next day due to soreness from puckering.

 

[Scoot]

I don't think it's wrong or unethical to give an animal extra time because it has a nice set of antlers. There's more at stake so why not be more cautious?

It's ok to disagree, but it doesn't make someone else a lesser hunter because they value antlers as much as meat.

Glad it's ok to disagree, because I totally disagree. I do my level best to recover an animal I shoot out of respect for the animal and the entire process of hunting. I see it as disrespectful to treat a doe different than a big buck. If you see it differently, that's ok by me too. But... I think you're view is simply not right and frankly not particularly ethical.

 

[Scoot]

Predators throw a serious monkey wrench into the "should I leave it or follow it now?" decision. Even when it's otherwise smart to leave it overnight, predators turn my decision making around sometimes.

 

[jmez]

People wait too long. It is a by product of the "industry" that hunting has become. When is the last time you saw a doe shot where they waited overnight? They leave well hit ones overnight so they can pictures in the daylight. A lot of cases it has nothing to to do with the hit. Handy excuse for not having to explain why you left the guts in it for 14 hours.

You hit them correctly they are dead within minutes. It was touched on above. Rarely, if ever, is the shot placement where you thought it was. Shoot the animal then you go looking for it. Most of the next day recoveries are nothing more than confirmation bias. I found him because I waited!!! Since you didn't look the night before you have no idea how long they have been dead. Unless they are still moving or not yet stiff.

Because they didn't go down in sight is not a reason to back out.

 

[mi650]

I'm in the track 'em camp. I can count on one hand the deer I've left overnight, last one being about 10 years ago. And it had nothing to do with antler size, but lack of blood after a near perfect pass-thru shot. My cousin and I, both decent trackers, spent an hour looking for tiny specks of blood. There was no choice but to get back at it in the daylight.

After another hour the next morning, we still were finding nothing. About then a neighbor walked by, asked if we were looking for a dead buck. He'd happened to stumble across him while tracking a doe he shot that morning. That buck made it 30 yards across the property line, and we'd never have found him if not for my neighbor.

And when I say 'near perfect shot', this is the entrance:

18 yard shot, 2" 3-blade broadhead.

Exit was under the shoulder, can't really see it, but this is how we found him:

There was a lake of blood inside his chest, but for whatever reason almost none of it came out. He made it about 85 yards, and was dead within 30 seconds.


A few years before that, I left a doe out overnight after shooting her in a light rain. I used a Game Tracker that I had taken a couple practice shots with. It still pulled my arrow low-left and I saw it was a gut shot. That was the last time I used a Game Tracker, even in the rain.

Anyway, after a deer is out of sight and earshot, I pull out my binos and start looking for blood and my arrow/bolt immediately. Ideally I can follow the blood trail from my treestand and start to determine what kind of hit I'm dealing with. Nice bright red blood, spraying out both sides, and I'll wait 15 minutes before I climb down and start tracking. Anything else and I'll give it 1/2 an hour to climb down and see what I can see.

Regardless, unless I'm dealing with a gut shot, I'll be tracking that night. Maybe right away, maybe I'll come sit in the house for an hour, but I'm going to do my best to find it that night.

 

[Macintosh]

@sndmn11 to use your words the "conclusion" I am arguing for is "based on what I know and what I dont know at this point in the blood trail, the odds of recovery are as-good or better if I DONT keep pushing this animal right now".

at no one in particular: I am NOT saying to back out if you have good blood and all signs point to a good hit. All I am saying is that if (when) you find yourself in a situation where you are forced to acknowledge that you did NOT make a good hit and you are wavering on that line of "should I back out or should I keep trailing?", that unless its really warm, or there are coyotes everywhere, or it is threatening hard rain, that backing out to come back in several hours or in the morning may very well be more-likely to result in fully recovering the animal in useable form. The reason there is media advocating for waiting, is becasue too many people dont wait long enough.

 

[SuperDUECE22]

Maybe you misunderstood my meaning? Care to elaborate?

If you shoot a nice elk or deer do you just leave the antlers in the woods or do you take them home and send your buddies pics?

If you meant what you typed I understood it perfectly. No need to elaborate, Let's just agree to disagree.

And no, I don't send or post any photos of animals I harvest.

 

[screedler]

I went through this dilemma last week with a young blacktail buck I shot. He jumped forward as I pulled the trigger, leading to a bad shot/gut shot instead of the lungs where i had been aiming initially. He went straight into the thick reprod and I had a decision to make. I tracked him and found where he had been laid up within about 20 minutes. Put a neck shot on him and now my freezer is as full as I'd hoped.

Going in head first like that felt extremely risky knowing he could be bumped easily. But I felt I had no choice but to finish what i had started. I feel so lucky to have tracked him successfully. Negligible blood. But deer trails took me right to him, I was in disbelief and snapped a pic before finishing him off. So happy to have gotten him down sooner than later because I didn't want to sacrifice a lot of meat to gutshot bile and juices simmering in him.

 

[Ucsdryder]

I don't think it's wrong or unethical to give an animal extra time because it has a nice set of antlers. There's more at stake so why not be more cautious?

It's ok to disagree, but it doesn't make someone else a lesser hunter because they value antlers as much as meat.

I thought these guys handled it well:

So nice horns, leave overnight, small horns go get it. Ok got it!

 

[Scoot]

I find it really interesting the number of people who are simply in the "I track em immediately" or "I leave em overnight" camps. To me, that's way too simple- to me, it's a decision making process that leads me to one of those two decisions. For those who "track em immediately", how many times have you bumped a gut shot deer/elk/critter only to lose it? If that's your approach, it will happen eventually, if you hunt very long.

Also, I think it's worth pointing out that most of us who leave em for morning aren't doing it one bit for good light for video/pics- we're doing it to increase our odds of finding the animal. So to say leaving a critter overnight is simply an insta-impact or social media influence isn't true for a lot of people.

Lastly, of course if you hit em where you're supposed to they go down quickly. Unless you're the best ever, damn lucky, or haven't hunted very long, you haven't hit every critter you shot at exactly where you should have. I'm a good shot and I'm very picky with the shots I take (too picky probably) and I certainly haven't hit every one where I wanted. If I hit a critter where I'm supposed to, I could probably get out of my stand/spot before the arrow was fully on the ground and have little impact on the outcome. But that's not really what this is about, in my opinion. ...and, also my opinion, if you have a one size fits all approach to tracking, you're missing the boat a lot of the time.