Continued Efforts To Legislate Ideals

This past summer, I began a mild debate on a fledgling group in North Dakota whose bent is to outlaw “shooting captive deer, elk and other exotic mammals behind escape-proof fences”. If you would like to catch up on previous articles, you can find them here, here, here and here.

This group calls itself the North Dakota Hunters for Fair Chase. There will always be the debate about ethics and no two people can ever agree completely on what is ethical and what isn’t ethical when it comes to hunting or killing for that matter. What happens is when you have a group of individuals who believe they can set the standards on ethics, it creates a myriad of problems, most of which when combined will create far greater problems than anything they are tying to change.

I would like to take material from the NDHFC website to show a point. This is a quote this group uses as the keystone for their efforts.

“Voluntary adherence to an ethical code elevates the self-respect of the sportsman, but it should not be forgotten that voluntary disregard of the code degenerates and depraves him.” Aldo Leopold, “A Sand County Almanac”, 1949. Oxford University Press, New York.

I am left to wonder if anyone in this group recognizes the word “voluntary”? Is there a difference between seeking the voluntary adherence to an ethical code and forcing those to comply with someone else’s? I’ll repeat myself and say that ethics is difficult to define and is very personal. I’ll also rightly admit that the best way to teach or promote an ethical adherence is by example. Nothing will be taught by forcing some to have to follow the beliefs of others. This isn’t what this country was founded on.

And this is where I will get the argument that groups such as this have the right to bring initiatives to the voting booths and let the voters decide. I have never said anyone didn’t. The problems are varied and just as equally as these groups have a right to campaign the citizens of North Dakota into believing their “brave new world” is the answer, I have the right to present reasons why to the contrary.

I have no issue with the NDHFC group and their perspective on what they deem to be fair chase and ethics. If an individual wants to conform to those same imposed ethical standards, they certainly are free to do so. I just don’t believe legislating it is the way to promote it. Once again from the website.

We base our support of hunting on sound science and ethical behavior applied in the interest of wild game, not based on the economic and ethical expedience of those engaged in the practice of high fence killing. Shooting tame deer, elk and exotic mammals inside escape proof fences is unethical and a poor example for our children and grandchildren.

I believe it is safe to say that nearly every state fish and game department, hunting club, etc. base their support of hunting on sound science and ethical behavior. This is why each state has rules. These rules are to promote and protect the scientific management of our game animals and to promote public safety.

They show no support and therefore no regard for aspects of the state’s economy that they have taken upon themselves to deem as negligible. Those who, as free Americans, chose to engage in the industry of ranching animals such as deer, elk, etc., are now in danger of losing everything because a group wants power over them. I wonder how members of this group would feel if their livelihood was being taken away by the same means by others who want power over them?

Does the practice of hunting behind fences or the so-called “innocent slaughter” of these domestic animals set a poor example for our children and grandchildren? What do you say to the millions of ranchers across American who have “slaughtered” their animals for centuries? Now our farmers and anyone who has killed a head of cattle, sheep, goat, elk or deer is some kind of unethical monster that needs to be disbarred from our society? Is this group also in the practice of legislating how parents are to raise their children? Evidently they don’t feel that any of the rest of us know how to sit down with our children and explain about the realities of life. Instead we should disregard the rights of others, trample all over their property rights and put ranchers out on the street. This sets a far greater example to our children and grandchildren than explaining the truths behind ranching.

One has to question the content that the NDHFC puts up on their website. Here’s what they say about those who run elk ranches.

The Elk pictured above isn’t wild and will never be wild. When this bull grows “trophy quality” antlers, something the owner will guarantee by feeding the bull supplements that stimulate antler growth, the Elk will be a target for a so-called “hunter” for something the High Fence Industry mislabels a “hunt”. The practice of shooting these tame domestic animals inside escape proof fences is what we oppose and seek to ban with this initiative.

It is one thing to suggest to the public that someone paying a fee to shoot and kill an animal to take home and eat is unethical but I think that unless the laws that govern elk ranching in North Dakota are far different than other states, ranchers are not allowed under law to feed their animals illegal supplements for the sole purpose of growing antlers. Ranchers are smart and know their business. They know how to yield big antlers strictly from breeding practices. This false accusation that elk ranchers beef their animals up on steroids and other illegal drugs has gone on for some time. I would presume that if the NDHFC has proof of this accusation, they should make it public, otherwise they should remove this statement from their website.

This debate is far from over. The citizens of North Dakota will have to make the decision, providing NDHFC can get enough signatures to get their initiative on the November 2008 ballot. Unfortunately, the information the voters get won’t be all facts. Perhaps millions of dollars will be spent to accomplish what? I can tell you one thing it will accomplish. If this initiative were to pass, the likes of the Humane Society of the United States, PETA and tons of other animal rights groups will be foaming at the mouth to get into North Dakota and continue the onslaught to end hunting once and for all. If you don’t believe me, talk to people in other states who are dealing with similar issues or you can continue to bury your head in the sand.

I would like to know what a group like NDHFC would answer someone who asks this: HSUS, PETA, et. al. view all hunting and killing of animals as unethical. I assume you will not support these groups when they come to North Dakota to put a stop to your hunting or to some other group that wants to put an end to you or your friends’ businesses. If not, how can you justifiably do the same as these groups in forcing your ethics onto others and at the same time running somebody out of business? Isn’t this the epitome of hypocrisy?

I would like to leave readers with this statement that was made in an article in the Dickinson Press yesterday by Mitch Feininger, who, according to the article, supports the initiative and is a hunter.

“I have never been to one of these operations because I feel they are immoral and unethical,” he said. “One does not need to participate in something they consider immoral or unethical to consider it wrong.”

I don’t think it is illegal to visit an elk or deer hunting ranch nor do I think a visit is immoral. I’m assuming Feininger believes actually participating in a hunt of this kind as being immoral and unethical. It is too bad that people will blindly cast a ballot simply by what one group has told them. I am sure most ranch owners would welcome a visitor.

Tom Remington

10 Ways To Alienate A Farmer/Rancher/Land Owner

The above was the title of an article I found today at the Daily News, which I guess I can conclude that it comes out of North Dakota. The article goes quite nicely when the author lists 10 ways in which a hunter can anger a landowner with whom he might be seeking permission to hunt or already have permission to hunt on his land. Click this link and you can read his/her list of things we shouldn’t do as hunters.

It’s a bit of a mystery as to who wrote the article as I can find no one seeking to sign their name to it, so your guess is as good as mine. The problem with the article begins immediately after the list of 10 things that will tick off a landowner. The article should have been titled, “11 Ways to Alienate…….”, not 10.

After spending so much time sharing with readers about all the things we need to be careful of in dealing with landowners, he/she didn’t include crucifying them in the press. I’m not sure if this was his intention or not but this is the result.

His/her anger becomes directed at one particular landowner who, it seems, may be taking capitalism to extremes. If what this writer says is true, a particular herd of big horn sheep reside on this one rancher’s land and he’s decided to cash in by charging anyone who draws a tag to hunt a sheep from this herd $1,500 to access his land. The writer runs completely contradictory to the 10 items he/she lists.

These are once-in-a-lifetime licenses of which only three are issued per year (four if you count the auction tag). Those who draw a tag are not your typical wealthy sheep hunter. They’re hard-working North Dakotans who cannot afford to pay that kind of access fee. This rancher should be ashamed of himself and I don’t want to hear any baloney about it being his land. In this case, I don’t buy it.

Does the guy own the land or not? It may anger all of us that a landowner would do such a thing but whether the writer of this article likes it or not, this is his choice and right to do. This is not the approach anyone should be taking, especially one who just wrote an article in an attempt to educate hunters on good landowner/hunter relationships.

He further makes a statement I can’t believe is true.

The sheep and other wildlife were there before the rancher, and they’ll be there when he’s gone. I understand private property rights and any landowner’s desire to keep the crowds out during a general hunting season.

If I am to understand the reasoning here, the writer is saying that because the sheep where there first, he doesn’t have all of his rights as a landowner? Or is this just a case of him/her being mad because they can’t get what they want? I don’t think this writer does understand property rights. If he/she did, they wouldn’t be wanting to tar and feather this guy and talk so disrespectfully in the local press.

I’m not sure what it is the article writer is suggesting or implying that be done about the landowner.

Charging sheep hunters exorbitant access fees was happening in the Yellowstone River basin in Montana so the Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department simply closed all hunting of bighorn sheep in that area. Everyone lost in that case, but particularly the hunters.

This kind of thing disgusts me and it will be the end of hunting as we know it.

I don’t think the writer is alone with feelings of disgust but this kind of approach in dealing with a problem like this is equally disgusting. The landowner obviously sees that these desired sheep are on his land. Precedence has been set all across America for landowners to cash in on hunting access. It is and has become big business. Is it right or wrong? Does it matter? A landowner has every right, at least so far, to grant access to his/her land as they see fit. Is this writer suggesting we should further strip a landowner of rights? Getting a landowner to change his mind by dissing him in a public forum is about as effective as a hunter muddying up a landowner’s road, shooting his livestock or any of the other 10 things the writer listed.

I guess this landowner is different because the prize on the land is bigger than a few pheasants or whatever?

I would certainly hope that rational thinking people have made every effort to work with this landowner and all other landowners across North Dakota. Hunters are at the mercy of the landowner. State fish and wildlife agencies hopefully understand that their jobs become exponentially more difficult when landowners shut their land down. Landowner relationship programs should be discussed to find ways to make everyone as happy as is feasibly possible. North Dakota doesn’t need to rewrite the book on this. Other states have implemented landowner relations and incentive programs.

What this writer might not realize is that all too often hunters exclaim, “We must all stick together. We must protect our hunting heritage, etc.” Landowners are also a group that sticks together. And when you start angering one or two, the bad feelings begin to spread. Is that the objective of the hunters?

The Landowners Association of North Dakota puts this statement of concern right in the middle of their home page.

ND has more than twice as many acres in wildlife refuges than any other state in the central flyway. There’s over 60 wildlife refuges in our state. How much more do we need??
Many of the “conservation” programs have more to do with raising wildlife than conserving soil and water resources.

And a bit further into their website, you can find this statement.

Government now owns more than 1/3 of the land in the U.S. and continues to acquire land at an astounding rate. How much land should government control? The US Fish & Wildlife Service has expanded its land holdings more than 30 times in the last 35 years, from 2.7 million acres in 1956 to 91.3 million acres in 1989. This is twice the size of the state of North Dakota. The Nature Conservancy organization buys land at the rate of more than 1,000 acres a day, which it then sells to the government for a profit. These organizations have been considered non-profit and tax-exempt. LAND believes that society is best served when property remains primarily in private hands. We believe that individual land ownership carries with it a devotion and appreciation that can never be matched by government.

This is an organization that appears to have some very deep feelings about property rights. They should be respected and worked with, not against.

This is a complex issue when land gets shut down by the landowner and the wildlife on that land belongs to all the people. Generally speaking for centuries the landowner has understood hunting and have welcomed hunters onto their land to help manage the wildlife. That landscape is changing and presents a problem into the future that we have to find out how to deal with now. Offering up 10 suggestions to keep landowners happy is a step in the right direction. Cursing them in the same breath, makes no sense to me no matter how much we think it is disgusting.

Tom Remington

N.D. Fish And Game Makes Suggestions For Thinning Elk In Teddy Roosevelt National Park

As the debate continues over the best ways to thin out a ballooned elk population in Theodore Roosevelt National Park, the state Fish and Game Department is making some suggestions.

Game and Fish director Terry Steinwand says the National Park Service should allow volunteer hunters a chance to go after the elk. He says they`ll need to have taken a hunter safety course and get special training for the elk hunt. They`ll need a hunting license. The licenses would be distributed by a lottery system, and the hunting season would run from November to February.

Now it’s beginning to make some sense. Let’s hope the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Parks Service begin to see things in this light as well.

Tom Remington

Big North Dakota Elk?

I was sent some photos and a brief description of this elk taken but neither I nor the sender can seem to verify its authenticity but I thought the photo was at least worth the look.

Here’s what little information that came with the photos. It was shot north of Beach and scored 393 Boone and Crockett green, claiming to be the third largest ever in North Dakota. Shot at 400 yards, three times with a .300 Winchester magnum.

Some zones of North Dakota opened for elk hunting in mid August. From what I understand, it is not unusual to find elk that time of year shedding velvet.

This photo was shown and discussed briefly at the NodakOutdoors forums. One member there claims to know the guy in the photo. That’s the extent of anything else on this hunt I can find.

Tom Remington

Dad’s Rifle – A Family Heirloom

By Bob Lane

In many hunting families, guns are handed down from generation to generation. When a family member no longer desires to, is unable to hunt, or is deceased, the rifles, pistols, and shotguns are often passed on to the hunting offspring or grandchildren of the former hunter. The sentimental value and memories attached to the firearms often far outweigh the monetary value of the guns themselves. Read more

Slow Elk

By Becky Sather

Growing up in a big city I never got the chance to enjoy the simple pleasure of hunting. Moving to Prineville Oregon, a major hunting town, the year of my high school graduation was a huge culture shock. I worked at a gas station during hunting season my first year in Prineville. Seeing so many people; male, female, rich, not so rich, young, and old filling up their vehicles to go out in the woods to shoot at Bambi confused me. Filling up the homebound hunter’s vehicles that had the head of Bambi proudly strapped to the truck in a spot just right for the deer to stare at me—extremely confusing. Read more

Bringing Wolves Back Violated The Public Trust

An opinion piece reared an ugly head in the environment section of New West on September 16, 2007 by George Wuerthner. From the article, this is what it says about Wuerthner. Read more

Through Better Men than I

By Master Sargent Mike Sibley

I can hear their whispers wherever I go. “Control your breathing, concentrate on the blade, and squeeze.” “Feel your way along with your toes instead of watching your feet.” “Work your way down through that black-growth and you’ll find ‘em in that stand of beech.” So persistent are they that I sympathize with a schizophrenic who feels as if he’s never alone. Unlike him, my voices are not a psychotic delusion created by chemical imbalances crying out for the saving grace of lithium. Real men spoke those words and no amount of time or distance will ever silence them. They are my last connection to a past that I crave but know I’ll never see. They define the man who hears them. And I pray they shape the lives of my sons. Read more

Tree Stand Tips

By Robert Lane

Bob Lane is a Licensed Master Maine Guide and photographer. He has also guided Caribou Hunters and Fishermen on float trips in Southwest Alaska.

July’s warm, sunny weather doesn’t provide much incentive to think about deer hunting to outdoorsmen who are trolling for deep swimming salmon and togue, whipping out the fly line during the drake hatch, or pursuing numerous other activities in the Maine woods this time of year.

This time of year I find myself occupied with trying to decide where I’m going to fish during the week and on the weekends, and trying to fit the kayaking and photography in to boot. Being an avid outdoorsman is no easy task. With the expanded archery season opening in September, rifle season for the elusive whitetail opening in November, now is the time to begin preparation to increase your odds for a successful hunting season. Rifles need to be sighted in, bows and arrows need to be tuned, and shooting practice begun in earnest, and, if you hunt from a climbing tree stand, it needs to be inspected and readied for the upcoming days afield.

Over the last 10 seasons, I’ve shot nine deer from my portable climber and I swear by the method. I’d no more go out without it than I would without my favorite rifle. However, I find that the tree stand is the most overlooked piece of equipment in the hunter’s arsenal. Its usually hung in the garage, or tucked away in the cellar and forgotten about until a few days before the season opens. That’s no time to discover a problem that may require a repair or replacement part. Now is the time get it ready for archery and rifle season.

First and foremost is to go over the stand and check the welds. Make sure that they are still solid. I had a crack in one on a stand a few years ago. Luckily I caught it before I went out. It was a simple matter to get it repaired.

If your stand attaches to the tree by cables, check these carefully for fraying and general wear. Any doubt about their integrity is reason enough to replace both of them. If one is bad, most likely the other one will be too. Most manufacturers sell these and a variety of replacement parts for their climbing and stationary stands.

If yours is an older climber and made of steel, attach it to a tree and get in it. Stand up, sit down, twist, and turn and listen for any creaking noises, squeaks etc. Nothing will alert a deer to your presence more than a noisy stand. I lost a shot at a nice buck years back because of it. This is critical if you are a bow hunter and are shooting at close range. The deer that busted me was almost 40 yards away when my stand creaked.

Noise isn’t such a problem with the new aluminum models. I have one of these, but I still get in it just to be sure. I have found that birch trees combined with a climbing stand will make noise even after the stand has been secured in place. Most noise can be cured by tightening a loose part and making sure that it is snug against the tree when reach the desired height.

On steel stands rust can be a factor. It gives off odor that an animal can detect. Ask any fox or coyote trapper about rust. They dye and wax their traps to keep them from oxidizing and emitting a smell. Just because you’re 15 feet off the ground doesn’t mean scent from you and your equipment will go undetected by a deer. A number of variables such as temperature, wind, air density will affect how scent is carried to the nose of a wary whitetail. Any rust should be removed with a wire brush and the area repainted to prevent further rusting during the season when the stand is exposed to the elements. Doing so will also increase the life of the stand.

Once I’m up in my stand I stay all day, and that requires that I be comfortable. Cushions will wear out and the covering will deteriorate over time making them uncomfortable, or unusable. Sitting over a prime trail or feeding area is no place to be moving around in a tree stand trying to get comfortable. Check those seats early in the season and if they aren’t up to the job, repair or replace them. Again most manufacturers carry these and other replacement parts.

I always go over my safety harness at the end of each season and again in the summer, and check for fraying and other wear. Most harnesses have a special tacking on the tether strap that connects from the back of the harness to the tree, and is designed to lessen the shock of a fall. Most of these are designed to be used only once. Check yours to be sure this tacking is still intact. If it isn’t, consult the manufacturer before you use it.

I keep two four point harnesses in my truck at all times in case one becomes unserviceable. If you forget yours, either go back home and get it, or hunt from the ground. The records of injuries incurred as a result of falls from trees stands are grim. Many a hunter has been crippled for life and others have been killed from falls from as low as ten feet up.
Under no circumstances should you use anything but a four point harness when hunting from a tree stand. The old type that consisted of a belt around the waste could cause a hunter to hang doubled at the waist, or inflict serious internal injuries. Last year I saw a guy in a stand with a hank of tow rope under his shoulders attached to the tree by two half-hitches with about two feet of slack in the tether rope. It was a recipe for disaster if I ever saw one.

My harness is on and attached to the tree as soon as I’m in the stand, and before I start climbing, as the majority of falls occur when ascending and descending the tree. Once I’m up in position I take all of the slack out of the tether. This pretty much eliminates any shock when the harness fetches up should I fall. The shock of a two hundred pound body falling a foot or even six inches and then being suddenly fetched up is painful at best and could result in injury. No slack in my tether also allows me to use it as a stabilizer and lean out over the stand when bow hunting.

Always carry a cell phone and let someone know where you are and when you expect to be out of the woods when hunting from a tree stand. I have several emergency numbers pre-programmed into mine. My phone has a lanyard on it that is looped through the buttonhole in the flap of my shirt pocket, eliminating the possibility of dropping it. If you should have a mishap and are unable to climb back down the tree, the phone could mean the difference between a long stint and possibly an overnight hanging in your harness. Your chances of hanging up-right and being able to call someone on the cell phone are better if you are strapped into nothing less than a four-point safety harness. Over the last couple of years I’ve seen several devices on the market that are designed to assist hunters in getting back to the ground after they have fallen and are hanging in a safety harness. These can be found with a little searching on the web. Summit is a major manufacturer of tree stands, harnesses, and accessories. I’ve had good luck with their products. Check them out at www.summitstands.com

Tree stand inspections and proper safety procedures don’t take a lot of time or effort, or even cost much for that matter. They can save a day’s hunt or even a life. While not all falls are fatal, many, hunters have seen an abrupt end to their hunting days due to crippling injuries resulting from a fall from a tree stand that hasn’t been properly maintained, or used in conjunction with a safe, four-point harness.

When opening day rolls around, I want to be up in my favorite tree at daybreak, watching the shadows give way to the day, and listening to the sounds of the woods waking up. I’ll watch the edge growth, the hardwoods, and the thickets, confidently focusing on the hunt, knowing that my stand is secure and my harness safe, because I took the time to go over my gear well before the onset of the best season of the year.

After The Shot

By Jerry Allen

Blood In Motion: A Forensic Guide to Blood Tracking

It takes a lot of work to set up and execute a hunt, but what happens after the shot will determine if the hunt is truly a success.
You’ve scouted and set up stands. You’ve sighted in your guns and bows; maybe planted a food plot and hauled bait into the woods. It’s hard work, to say the least, and finally the animal comes in and the shot is made. How long will the trailing process take you? Will you find the animal? Understanding how to track and find blood can make the difference between having meat and a trophy to show for all the hard work that you have put in — or coming home with nothing at all. You make a plan when you hunt to increase your chance of success, but if you track without a plan, your chances of success are greatly reduced.
I sell blood-detection products to law enforcement, and my business has giving me a lot of information on what to look for and what a blood trail can tell you about the hit you’ve made on an animal. I am called to many deer trails after all hope seems to be lost, because many people know that I can find blood that cannot be easily seen. Blood trails can be misleading to the hunter —lots of blood does not necessarily indicate a mortal wound, nor does a seeming lack of blood necessarily mean the animal isn’t dead.
The reaction of the animal and the blood pattern will give us a better understanding of how to go about recovering an animal. Normally, animals do not bleed to death, as an animal that weighs 160 pounds must lose 45+ ounces to die from blood loss alone. Animals will die faster from trauma than blood loss, and a combination of both is by far the best.
Most animals can travel very fast when wounded — deer can hit 35 mph, and even if they die quickly after the shot, they can travel a long distance before collapsing. A wounded animal will not go far unless it is pushed or sees movement. Sit still for at least a half hour, or you will make the tracking more difficult. Now that many states offer multiple tags, this will also give you a chance to get another animal — if you shot a large buck, it is still possible that there is a larger one close behind him. Most animals travel in loose groups; the animals in the rear of the group can help by showing you where the wounded animal traveled. Spooking these animals will remove helpful clues to the whereabouts of your trophy, and may cause a second opportunity to be wasted.
Pay attention to the reaction of the animal when it is shot, as this is your first clue to helping you know how to find it. The reaction can be deceiving, but it is still important. I have shot deer and had them look at me like nothing happened, only to watch them fall over where they stand. I have had many hunters tell me that they knocked the animal down, only to watch it suddenly jump up and run off, leaving lots of blood.
This is the one that I hate to hear the most. First of all, body shots that do not impact the neck or spine rarely make animal drop, and if the neck or spine is hit, the animal is usually disabled and cannot get up. The clues of the “dropped and got up and left lots of blood” tell me it was most likely a leg or low shoulder hit. The falling down likely means the leg was broken; lots of blood usually indicates a muscle hit. Muscle damage leave lots of blood in the first 100 yards, but then the blood trail fades fast. There will be lots of large spots of blood as the animal stands often and will lean against trees. Even with a broken leg (or two), an animal can run very fast.
I have had a lot of people tell me, “I thought I hit it, but there was no blood.” Any time there is a wounded animal, there is blood, even if it cannot be seen. Blood droplets, which are forced out of the body by gunfire, produce a high-velocity-impact splatter pattern. The pattern can be smaller than 1 mm in the beginning of the trail. Shots taken with a bow leave medium-impact blood splatter patterns and will leave droplets around 3 mm in size. Both can be difficult to see, even in the snow, so trust your instinct and follow the trail the deer took. If the deer was hit, the blood will appear soon. If it was a lung hit, it can take time for the body cavity to fill and blood to be forced out. Animals may run in the beginning of the trail; this will cause blood trails to be harder to see, as the blood is spread over a larger distance. If there is no visible blood trail, wait and let the animal lay down — it will not go far and should die quickly.
Another common animal reaction is the hind leg kick. This reaction indicates that the animal was hit farther back, most likely a gut shot. The blood pattern and the color of the blood will be very important. Darker blood is from the stomach or liver. A liver shot is always fatal, but is still a poor shot to take. Green matter or food is from one of the deer’s four stomachs — a fatal shot, but it will most likely take until the next day or later for the deer to die from a stomach shot. Give this animal at least three hours and follow up in the daytime.
The double lung shot is the best-percentage shot to take, as it will cause massive internal bleeding and drowning, causing death within about 150 yards. This pattern will start out with little blood, but it will increase as the animal starts blowing blood out the mouth and nose.
Quartering-away shots always cause the most damage, as the projectile will travel more distance through the body. Shots from a raised area (tree stand) generally give a better blood trail, as the exit hole will be lower and allow blood to leave the body cavity in greater volume.
Shooting for the tail is the worst shot, leaving only a wounded animal or spoiled meat. If the shot hits the back of the thigh, it will bleed well but will not die soon, as the muscle will tighten up and help stop the bleeding. An animal shot in the anus will spread bacteria all over the insides, and the damage will be even worse if the bladder is also hit. This type of shot requires the animal to be cleaned immediately and thoroughly washed out in order to save any of the meat.

So I Have A Wounded Animal, Now What?
Blood trailers spend a lot of time looking on the ground, but little time looking at the brush, where more than half the blood is usually found. Blood on brush can reveal how high or low the shot hit, helping in the recovery plans.
No hunter should be without a compass — use it to get a bearing on the trail taken using a marker like a unique tree to track to. Working in pairs is best; have one tracker circle ahead 75 to 100 yards in case the animal is alive. Then have the second person take the trail. Repeat this until the animal is recovered. Remember to be safe when tracking, because all animals are dangerous when wounded. Proper gun handling and line-of-fire rules must be followed to avoid injury.
Timing is very important. Tracking too soon is the main reason mortally wounded animals travel a long distance and make recovery difficult or impossible. Tracking too slowly will cause the meat to spoil. Reading the clues properly will make the difference in how good the meat tastes, since recovery shortly after death is important. Meat with a gamey taste can be caused by slow recovery, not cleaning properly or hanging in warm weather.
Adrenaline runs high after the shot, and humans have a hard time controlling it. Relax, breathe deeply and take a few moments to reflect about what happened. The beginning of the trail is the most important place to get the facts of what happened and how to proceed.
The first thing we do at a crime scene is cordon off the area to keep people from altering evidence. Then we use only a few people to process the scene, again, to keep from altering or destroying the evidence. Walking on a blood trail will transfer the blood pattern from its original spot to somewhere else, or destroy it completely. Never put more than three people on a trail unless it is hopeless to recover without extra people. Mark the trail as you progress to give you a travel pattern to study for clues.
Unless the animal drops within sight, no trail should be taken within 30 minutes. The animal you just shot will be looking at the spot where it was wounded to see what happened. It will lay down soon and try to lick or heal the wound, usually with in 40 yards if there is cover. Do you want to turn a 40-yard trail into a 400-yard trail?
Many times I am asked to follow a blood trail that had a small amount of blood that suddenly had twice as much blood, then nothing. This usually means the animal has turned 180 degrees and walked over the same trail twice, then cut off at a 45- or 90-degree angle after it decided the trail it was following was not safe.
The blood left on the ground or brush is important, as it can tell much about the wound. Bright red or pink indicates an artery or lung shot. Many animal trails I have followed were from shots that hit low in the shoulder or leg, leaving large amounts of blood. The blood is slightly darker with a very narrow trail 4 to 8 inches in width. This animal will likely need a second shot. Make plans to get a person ahead to dispatch the animal. Trails of blood more than 2 feet wide are complete pass-through shots and increase the chances of recovery greatly. Blood trails that have squirts of blood on the side of the trail 2 feet or more indicate arterial shots in the neck, heart or other major artery. Give the animal time to bleed out before you start tracking. Brown or greenish blood, or blood with green or brown matter, is always a gut or liver shot — in both cases, the animal will need extra time to die before you attempt to recover it. The liver shot will kill faster, but may still take two hours or more. Blood with green matter is a five- or six-hour wait to track. The tracker should attempt to put a shooter ahead to dispatch the animal if it is still alive.
Many visual blood trails disappear when the animal’s heart stops and the blood pressure drops, as the blood is no longer being forced out of the body. Most animals can still travel 30 to 45 seconds and cover 65 yards or more before dropping, and the blood trail will be almost impossible to see without blood-tracking aids. Bluestar® will come in handy, as the animal will be close by but may not be seen because of terrain or brush.
Many times I have found animals within 40 to 50 yards of the stand, where they died after having run 250 to 300 yards in a long arching circle, trying to get back to the spot they were safe in before the shot. Knowing the bedding areas helps a lot if you cannot find an animal.
There are tools we can use in tracking. Dogs are now legal in many states, and are a great tool if there is no rain or snow. However, most people do not have dogs or have the time to train them, nor do they have the money to pay a dog tracker. Dog tracker fees vary but usually end up around $150. Lights made for finding blood do not work very well, as blood absorbs light. Regardless of what you see on TV, law enforcement officials do not use lights to find blood. There are a few luminol-based products (Tink’s® and Bluestar®, notably) that make blood glow in the dark. I prefer Bluestar® because it was first made for forensic use.
Bluestar®’s inventor, Dr. Loïc J. BLUM, with a Ph.D. in chemiluminescence, has perfected the mixture, making it the easiest and strongest blood finder in the world. It is used in more than 70 countries by law enforcement and hunters alike.
Bluestar® picks up hemoglobin, which transports oxygen to the cells. Hemoglobin contains iron, which is a basic element of earth and is nearly impossible to destroy without fire.
Much time was spent to produce a product that the investigator would need little or no training to use and that could tell the difference between blood and other items containing iron.
Sold in tablets that you add to water, this is the best tracking agent on the market today. At a cost of $19.95 to track four animals, the cost is very affordable. You can usually cover 100 yards in 10 minutes or less, and the time saved will be worth the money spent.
Small and lightweight and sold in packs of four, Bluestar® gives the hunter enough to cover even the longest trails. Bluestar® also will work well in evergreens and moss, because the reaction with blood is so much different from “false positives” that any one can tell the difference. Bluestar® was made for law enforcement to find blood amounts so small the DNA profile cannot be done. Even in the crime scene, clothing or items that have been cleaned over and over will still glow bright blue were blood was present.
Many times the hunter cannot find the beginning of the trail. Before you leave the stand, use a waypoint to know where the animal was standing when the shot was taken. A compass is perfect for this, using a marker such as a tree to find the spot.
Many times I use Bluestar® only to find the start of the blood trail. To do this, spray while walking across the trail as soon as you find the blood. See if you can follow it with your eyes; if not, continue to use the Bluestar®. I often use it to regain a trail when an animal changes terrain, going from leaf litter to grass fields, for example. Bluestar® will work in the rain or snow.
You will learn a lot about trailing when using Bluestar®, since you will see the whole trail every time you use it and can key in on the evidence the blood trail leaves.
Since it glows bright blue in the dark, even people who are colorblind or whose eyes are “not as good as they used to be” can follow the trail without any help. No glasses or lights are needed, just water and a spray bottle. Water can be taken from streams, lakes and ponds along with any tap or bottled water. In extreme cold, you can use window washer solvent.
Another advantage of Bluestar® is total darkness is not needed, just low light after shooting hours end.
Mix a set of tablets in a sprayer and spray on the ground where the animal was standing, and if the animal was hit, there will be a bright blue glow. Blood is easily transferred from one place to another, so stay off the trail or you will leave footprints of blood all over the woods. There will be an unbroken trail of blood where the animal went when using Bluestar®. If you just find blood spots here and there, these are transfer patterns made by people and animals walking on the blood trail. Blood will be trackable for a very long time. There has been a forensic study on Civil War sniper holes at the Shriver House museum in Gettysburg, Pa., and blood was found more 143 years after it was shed. Blood will last in the woods for months, but there is a big difference in the brightness between old trails and new ones. Blood on the hands of a hunter after gutting an animal without gloves will remain for weeks, no matter how well the hunter washes. This is used frequently in murder cases.
Last but not least, use trail markers. This will help if you need to leave the trail for any reason and will help anyone who is trying to join later on to find the trackers. This also gives a pattern of travel, which most likely will be an arch traveling back to the bedding area downwind of the stand. Bedding areas are thick with a good view and take advantage of wind direction, and they provide a perfect area for a wounded animal to try and recover.
So no matter what happens before or after the shot, there are tools that cost very little and will save lots of time, and help us remain ethically responsible by recovering game quickly and efficiently. For more info on Bluestar® go to http://bloodglow.com/. You can call Jerry anytime on his cell phone if you need help figuring out a trail. (888) 579-1965, toll free.

Next Page »