Conference vmsnet::hunting$note:hunting

That's a tough one, Ron.  You might try giving the game warden a call 
in your area to see what he (she? , so's not to be labeled sexist ;^)) 
says about it.  Tell him that you saw a badly wounded doe and see if 
he will come out to dispatch it or give you permission.  I doubt that 
he would give anyone else the ok to put it out of it's misery, though.

I'll admit that if I saw one wounded that couldn't get away I'd shoot 
it, too.  Unfortunately, if you're caught, you get to explain to some 
legal eagle that you were performing an act of kindness instead of 
wantonly slaughtering a doe out of season.  You'd probably get a 
lighter sentence if you'd robbed a bank, but that's a whole different 
ball of wax...

Scott

    You did the right thing in not shooting.  Best to let nature take it's
    course, even though it may seem harsh.  First, you are right in that a
    warden would not look upon what you did by shooting the doe as an act
    of kindness.  Second, perhaps the doe might actually survive the
    winter, although admittedly she'd have a tougher than normal time of
    it.  If she did, she also might bring forth a healthy fawn or two in
    the spring.
    
    Last spring I put a note in the fishing notes file that was similar to
    yours. I've caught many short landlocked salmon in Maine lakes and
    always let them go.  However occassionally one would be so badly hooked
    that it would just float belly up when released.  It seemed such a
    waste ro release a dead fish, so a couple times I did keep a floater. 
    When I asked about the ethics of this in the file the replies I got
    were unanimous in letting nature take it's course.  The dead fish might
    feed a hawk or eagle or be put to some other natural use and I wouldn't
    be guilty of breaking any laws, even though my intentions were good.
    
    I say you did the right thing in NOT shooting the doe.
    
    Pete
    

    
    You did the right thing, the warden would probably not look kindly on
    this, unless you know him and he knows you.
    
    I believe there was a note in here about a similar situation out west
    when a guy shot a suffereing cow elk, he got arrested.  Let nature take
    its course, the deer will not be wasted.  Also, I believe if you shot
    it and left it you would be breaking more laws than just one. (Not
    sure about this though).
    
    Tough call, but you did right.
    
    --Bob

    Ron,
    
    One thing you might want to do is call the warden and ask them what
    "they" would have offically recommended - and if their recommendation
    would have been effected if the deer was loosing blood.
    
    Dan
    
    

    Ron,
    
    Was curious on New Hampshire Fish&Game's position - just got off the
    phone........
    
    First - I was transferred over to the "Law Enforcement" division.
    
    Their position on a similar situation in NH, was for you to get on
    the phone with them asap. They would put you in immediate contact 
    (if necessary  via "radio") with the resposible warden.   I was told
    that they do not want any deer to suffer and if felt necessary they
    would ask you to put the deer out - but again - that was after you made
    contact with them.
    
    
    Dan
    Dan 
    contact with them........
    upon the deer's condition, they may have you 

    Glad to see that the Fish & Game would allow a responsible hunter
    to end that deer's misery.
    
    Tough situation.  On one hand, I'd say shoot the deer, but on the
    other, you can never tell.
    
    I'm glad I didn't stumble on that deer.  Tough choice.  At least
    she was eating, which indicates to me that the deer may not be in
    serious pain.  
    
    Mark.

    Oh yea, right.
    
    You're 3 and a half miles from the truck and you see this suffering
    deer.
    
    You:
    
    1)  Wip out your cellular phone, call information and get the number
    for F&W.  Then you call them and ask if it's okay to shoot the
    suffering animal.
    
    2) You hump the 3.5 miles back to your truck and drive to the nearest
    pay phone.  You call F&W and they say, "Oh, how horrible.  Please
    terminate the life of the deer.  Our sincerest thanks!"  You then get
    back in your truck and drive to your entry point.  You hop out and hike
    the 3.5 miles back to the deer, assuming that the deer decided to hang
    around while you made your phone call to the gods of euthanasia.
    
    Hmmmm......
    
    Seems to me that your decision is no clrearer than before.  If you have
    to make the decision in the woods, you won't have time to make any
    phone calls to F&W.  Now, had I conducted a mercy killing in the woods,
    I strongly doubt that I would call F&W to inform them that I was the
    do-gooder for fear of financial retribution.
    
    /brett
    
    P.S.  Had it been me, I would probably have left the deer.  In
    Washington it would have cost $1000 to take the doe out of its
    misery.  

    Re: -.1
    
    I agree........
    
    The point of .5 was that NH's "Legal" way was to contact them first....
    
    I even gave them some "what ifs", i.e;  X number of miles to/from,
    being able to find the deer again, even a deer that was down and 
    couldn't move, etc - and.......  was advised you had to contact them
    first..........................  
    
    It's obvious there may be situations where taking the "risk" of putting
    a deer out of it's misery or leaving it and letting nature do it's
    thing are up to the person who found it.  If the deer can get up and 
    move around, I'd leave it for nature (who knows, the deer might make
    it).  If the deer is down/can't move....  I'd probably do it - and
    not tell...........
    
    Dan
    

    My first reaction to the question in .0 is that I would 
    shoot the deer and leave it. My second reaction is, if
    the antis found a doe with a bullet hole left to rot in
    the woods, it would give them ammo in their crusade 
    against us. A good deed would be used as an excuse to 
    prosecute hunters, including me. I'd leave the deer alone.
    And I curse the antis who cause me to think like this.
    
    Dana Charbonneau
    
    PS and besides, the antis *like* the idea of the coyotes
    tearing the deer apart while it's still alive. It's
    *natural*. They make me sick.

     Well, I agree that you did the right thing. Apparently the deer was
    somewhat self-sufficient, and at least had a chance of survival. This
    is not the first three legged deer I've heard of.
     I think that nobody with half a brain would want an animal to suffer a
    slow death, but there are still legal considerations to be paid
    attention to. I feel that the warden service should always be contacted
    first, and get directions from there.
     If you should get the approval to put the animal out of its misery,
    the very next question you should ask is "how should I dispose of the
    body...I'd hate to see all that venison go to waste".  8^)   In many
    cases, the wardens can and will authorize you to dispose of the body as
    you see fit. (at least our local warden here in Maine will often use
    his own discression in these matters).
    
    Bob

    The latest issue of _Hunting_ magazine had an article on non-typical
    racks.  In it there was a pair of pictures of a buck that had its
    rear leg taken off below the knee (yes, I know its not REALLY a
    knee, but I can't remember what you call it).  The pictures were
    from two consecutive years.  The point was to show that a deformed
    rack happens on the opposite side of the injury.  But this guy looked
    pretty healthy, for having come through at least one winter.
    
    <<< T >>>