Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Abusing The Wounded Deer Tracking Law

T

thecreedeer

Member
I would like to hear peoples opinions or experiences with the current tracking law. I realize that not everyone is a landowner and there will be conflicting opinions on this law. I would hope that replies would be open minded and be able to see the side of the Landowner as well.
I own a piece of land that I try to manage the deer and selectively harvest the deer on my land. I plant food plots and have set up sanctuaries to leave deer undisturbed.
The way the law is currently, wounded deer may be pursued without obtaining permission from the Landowner as long as there is not a weapon in the possession of the hunter. I checked with the Conservation Officer and there is no law stipulating there must be an active blood trail. This means a hunter (or group of hunters) without an active blood trail can enter a property and start walking around. I have had hunters enter my property and push the areas where my deer are bedding in a blatant attempt to simply drive the deer out during gun season while the neighbors are waiting on the other side of the fence. This was the brilliant way to abuse the law and drive your neighbors property. Its dishonest, abusive, disrespectful and deceitful. If your neighbor does not allow deer hunting drive his property.
 
I think the law should state something like "must be able to show a blood trail"
We've had people abuse this law on our land - actively pushing out our entire timber to a bunch of waiting posters - all in the act of "trailing a wounded deer" suposedly
Big loophole in this aspect of the law if you ask me
Our gamewarden told me he would start writing trespassing tickets if the group searching had more than 2 0r 3 people in it - but the law doesnt read that way either - maybe it should?
 
I will say I'm torn on this one. I dont want to handicap the guy who does it right and wants to find a deer he wounded, but dont like how the law is abused. Thankfully our relationship with neighboring landowners has gotten better we will communicate to not ruin hunts and even get help (who knows the land, travel routes, and bedding locations better than the landowner). I'm not a huge fan of putting in active blood trail for the fact that gut shots (most likely the hit that is allowing the deer to travel to the neighbors anyway) sometimes contain tiny amounts of blood and grid searching is often what keeps you on the blood. However I have been on the side of it when a shotgun group has wounded a deer and pushed our sanctuary to find it and that resulted in a somewhat heated exchange when other deer were shot and shot at.
 
bigbuckhunter88 said:
I will say I'm torn on this one. I dont want to handicap the guy who does it right and wants to find a deer he wounded, but dont like how the law is abused. Thankfully our relationship with neighboring landowners has gotten better we will communicate to not ruin hunts and even get help (who knows the land, travel routes, and bedding locations better than the landowner). I'm not a huge fan of putting in active blood trail for the fact that gut shots (most likely the hit that is allowing the deer to travel to the neighbors anyway) sometimes contain tiny amounts of blood and grid searching is often what keeps you on the blood. However I have been on the side of it when a shotgun group has wounded a deer and pushed our sanctuary to find it and that resulted in a somewhat heated exchange when other deer were shot and shot at.
Click to expand...

My opinion on the subject
- If you have a blood trail - you can track deer unto neighboring property without consent - max 3 people and no weapons
- If you have no blood trail and feel the need to "grid-search" my entire property just because the deer "might" have gone in there - you are going to need landowner permission for that
 
gunrunr said:
My opinion on the subject
- If you have a blood trail - you can track deer unto neighboring property without consent - max 3 people and no weapons
- If you have no blood trail and feel the need to "grid-search" my entire property just because the deer "might" have gone in there - you are going to need landowner permission for that
Click to expand...
Should have clarified. I agree with you. The grid I was referring to was when you lose blood or the trail on a gut shot and grid a small area trying to pick it up again or determine direction of travel.
 
Last edited:
We tracked a buck I shot into neighbors this year. My understanding always has been 1 person, and required blood. I’m color blind so I had the wife tracking with me so we had 2 people. We tracked until last blood but then stopped and walked out the same trail we tracked. Not sure of exact laws. We were closer to the road than we were our property but without specific laws we just did that. It would be better if it was more clear for the people who are doing things right. The common theme is the people that are doing right, will always do it right. The bad apples will always be bad apples. Bigger fines and easier ways to prosecute would be nice. We turned in some people on our property. Had photos of them on our property, but couldn’t prove that it was posted where they entered the property so the DNR said it would be hard to make it hold since they didn’t “know”. (They only walked 1/4 mile across a picked cornfield to our property)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I don't like the law at all. I think you should have to have permission to go on any ones property. More than likely the land owner would go with you to track, or he would let you go by your self, and if he would not let you, all you have to do is call the game warden and he would take you in. This is the way it is in Missouri.
 
I wouldn’t agree with the “permission only” approach. Most deer growers would tell you to get bent because it would mess up their deer program as clearly stated in above post(s). If somebody wounds a deer they should have every right to finish the job or exhaust all options trying. We are all about ethics right? Do we stop caring about a wounded and suffering animal at the point where it might push “your” deer off of your property?

I could imagine calling joe big buck grower and telling him “I just hit this monster buck you’ve been growing the last 5 years and he went on your farm, do you care if I go in there and look for him?” We know the answer already. If deer growers were given the option of yes/no, it would more often be no than yes.

I also understand how the current law could be abused but I don’t want landowners given the right to decide wether or not you can go track the deer. Would seem to be one step closer to deer ownership a lot on here already feel entitled to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I understand the point of pursuing game and being an ethical hunter. We all need to be ethical ,and without the responsibility for the animal we love and respect ,there becomes the difference of "Hunter and Killer". I do however feel it is not fair for a Landowner when there is a situation of obvious Trespassing, and the Trespasser can literally tell the the Landowner to take a hike, with no blood at all. A Deer drive is going on the Landowner can do nothing. Even worse a Landowner can see a Trespasser on a camera, Identify him , bring him to court and he can say...." I was tracking a deer". This is pretty bad, Giving the the person in question the upper hand.
 
I did NOT realize the law, as of now, does NOT require a blood trail?!? Oh my, I had that wrong. We all know what a % of folks would absolutely abuse this or already do. Heck ya, anytime u get a trespassing issue “I was just tracking”!! Shed season- “I was tracking a wounded coyote, woodchuck or crow”.
No blood - no tracking!! That spooks me it’s not law cause i know that’s how I used to understand it and think most others do as well.
 
Common sense would say you need some evidence to show the animal was wounded and crossed to another property. But, common sense isn't so common any longer.

Actual language in the trespass section is " This paragraph does not probibit the unarmed pursuit of game or furbearing animals lawfully injured or killed that come to rest on, or escape to, the property of another."
 
Nothing is going to change with this law that doesn’t already happen in the first place. Iowa’s trespass laws and small fines are such bs. We can’t keep guys from running coyote dogs across our section and all the deer out or people shed hunting farms before we get there. And if they aren’t just sneaking across all they need is a little bottle with blood in it to lay a trail across as they push the deer out without even bothering with a dog. Yes I want this to go through to help find a deer when I need it and no I won’t pay to have someone trail a doe.
 
Bottle of blood to use to push someone else timber ? I think if they want to push your timber, their going to find a way to some how some way. Any neighbor could go coyote hunting with his AK 47 up to your property line and shoot 60 rounds straight in the dirt and spook half the deer you got named and manicured right onto the next piece. You deer growers wont be happy till party hunting is over with, same song and dance every year .
 
The point I was trying to make was having blood tracking dogs isn’t going to increase or decrease trespassing in my opinion. And I don’t care about party hunting we used to do it to and it was a great time. If you shoot the deer on your farm pushing it right next to me good for you. It’s the blatant disregard for property lines by some groups that I wish we had stiffer fines for.
 
Last edited:
Shocks me Iowa isn’t the same as MO. Iowa seems to be stricter on a lot of other things.
Most people here in MO would let you look for a deer. Guys that would fake a wounded deer so they can bust through your honey hole to push deer out are complete dirt bags IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom