# Montana Gov Signs SB135. Blood tracking dogs



## huntinco (Sep 23, 2007)

http://borntotracknews.blogspot.com/201 ... g.html?m=1


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I like that, unfortunately such a law would never work here. Every wildlife law seems to be very slanted towards enforceability, which I can appreciate as such a law would be very difficult to enforce with the difference between legal and illegal use of dogs.


----------



## huntinco (Sep 23, 2007)

Such a law work very well here and actually clean things up. If NY and Cali have tracking laws then I'm sure Utah can handle it.


----------



## yfzduner450 (Dec 28, 2009)

I think it's a step in the right direction. It's pretty bad right now that you have to run outlaw to track a wounded animal with a dog. I've been involved in another state on recovery work and it's awesome to watch the dogs and without the dogs we never would of found the game.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

What a load of crap! That's all we need is a bunch of yahoos out running dogs during the hunt. As many a parent has said on many an occasion, "Just because the other kids do it doesn't make it right."

While dogs might reduce wounding loss, it's only common sense that their use would definitely increase the wounding rate by removing one of the key motivations for good shot selection, giving, at best, a net gain of no gain at all.

Utah currently has one of the lowest wounding rates ever documented. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.


----------



## huntinco (Sep 23, 2007)

Finnegan.... 
"That's all we need is a bunch of yahoos out running dogs during the hunt". 

Who are the yahoos? Running dogs, how fast can you run following a dog on a leash?

It's only common sense that their use would definitely increase the wounding rate by removing one of the key motivations for good shot selection, giving, at best, a net gain of no gain at all. 

Increase wound rate? Not true at all! Common sense is the main reason why leashed tracking laws work!

Fin, thanks for your feedback as it's always good to here what others think and why!
Justin


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

Wounding *rate* is the animals shot that hunters don't recover.

Wounding *loss* is unrecovered animals that die from their wounds. Those two numbers are very different as studies have shown that a big percentage of wounded animals survive the injury.)

With few exceptions, hunters pass shot opportunities that might not result in a fast kill. But with a dog waiting in camp or just a phone call away, a fast kill isn't essential and those exceptions (wounding rate) will definitely increase. The percentage of animals that a dog can recover won't increase, and it's not even close to 100%.

It's been consistently demonstrated that the best way to reduce wounding rates (and therefore wounding loss) is by education and regulations that reduce "iffy" shots.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

Great Finn, now all we gotta do is convince every speed bow idiot with an 90 yard pin to take "resposible" shots. NEVER gonna happen! Education will change NOTHING!!! Idiots are Idiots, period.

Using a TRAINED, LEASHED dog in the pursuit of a wounded animal is both responsible and ethical. In fact, If you don't hunt birds with a dog, you are unethical in my book. So how could the use of dogs to recover wounded game be anything but a good thing? Answer, It AINT! 

Most hunters aren't gonna debate weather or not to take a questionable shot based on if they do or don't have a tracking dog on hand. But rather how much smoke they had blown up their butt at the pro shop where they bought their speed bow with an 90 yard pin on it. THAT is the problem, not dogs.

I gotta hand it to ya though Finn, you sure are creative... :?


----------



## Theekillerbee (Jan 8, 2009)

Finn, I don't agree with ya on this. People with blood tracking dogs do not run around the forest looking for a deer that was stuck in the hind end. Blood tracking and chasing bear, cats, or ***** are 2 different styles of dog work. Blood tracking is done on a 10 meter leash, you are always with your dog, they are not off chasing and barking at everything that moves. I have a blood tracking dog, and that does not make me change my shot selection. I take my shots carefully, trying to only put them in the engine room. So far I have not needed my dog to help me find the animal, however a couple years ago (before I got my dog) a good friend shot a small 6X elk, right through the lungs, the arrow did not come out the other side, so it filled up with blood and didn't leave much on the ground. After hours/days of trying, he finally had to let the mag pies guide him in. The elk only went 200 yards, but died in some very thick scrub oak, and was a total loss. With a blood tracking dog, it would have been recovered. They are a great tool in recovering wounded animals. In Germany, your dog has to be able to blood track or they will not let you hunt them....no matter what game you are chasing.


----------



## yfzduner450 (Dec 28, 2009)

I for one would rather have my dog on a leash around all the idiot deer hunters, then them just running around "chasing" wounded deer. I take my dogs to deer camp and they wear orange from start to finish. I would hate to have to shoot someone for "thinking" my dog was a coyote. Finn, you are showing your lack of knowledge when it comes to dogs working. There is no reason why it would cause increase the wounded rate. Every year I hear about a quite a few animals wounded by a bow and never found. I've informed all of my buddies that if they wound an animal to call me and we'll see if we can get it found. Whether it's legal or not, I'm not going to waste an animal that may be found. Call me what you want to, but it all boils down to ethics for me. I will do anything in my power to find wounded game, isn't that what the proclamation says???


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

That is some good clarification! A lot of wildlife laws are written in a way that makes enforcement clear such as no firearms in archery camp (with some exceptions). I think the main objection would be that of enforceability; how can you tell if a guy is tracking a wounded animal vs. tracking a sited animal, etc. I fully support the idea; nothing is worse than losing an animal. There are hundreds of possible reasons for a poorly placed shot, many of them inexcusable, but many completely out of control of the hunter. Carrying a firearm with the dog probably would not fly IMHO. I remember as a teenager trying to track an elk that two uncles had shot from an unreasonable range of about 600 yards. The lack of dogs available did not make them change their shot and I felt pretty sick about not finding it; hopefully it made it just fine, but I can think of many situations in which it would have been difficult to find an animal that was shot very well and had the cover been thick enough animal would have been difficult.


----------



## Finnegan (Sep 7, 2007)

TEX-O-BOB said:


> Education will change NOTHING!!! Idiots are Idiots, period.


You know this teacher/coach/instructor disagrees. :lol:



yfzduner450 said:


> Finn, you are showing your lack of knowledge when it comes to dogs working.


You got me there. I've never seen a dog work big game. But I know how many hunters jump on any opportunity to try to cut corners. Just to be clear, I don't question you guys, your ethics or your ability with dogs. But do you really think everybody will follow your standard?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

yfzduner450 said:


> I would hate to have to shoot someone for "thinking" my dog was a coyote................................. Call me what you want to, but it all boils down to ethics for me.


Seriously? I hope you are just projecting machismo with this one.


----------



## yfzduner450 (Dec 28, 2009)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> yfzduner450 said:
> 
> 
> > I would hate to have to shoot someone for "thinking" my dog was a coyote................................. Call me what you want to, but it all boils down to ethics for me.
> ...


No Machismo projected on this one Tree, if you would've quoted the sentence before it I said that I make my dogs wear orange in deer camp. The whole point I was making, Finn said he didn't want dogs running around during deer season, and I was implying that having a dog off leash during the deer season can be very dangerous for the dog. Thankfully, I've never had a dog shot by an idiot but personally know people and I've witnessed it 1 time. Almost everytime they make a b.s excuse like I thought it was a coyote or it's trespassing. And yes, I will protect my family(including dogs) with whatever force is neccessary. With the time I spend with my dogs and some jerk off shoots my dog, yeah I'm gonna be pissed.


----------



## Pops2 (Jul 28, 2010)

FTR
the state code (not the regs, the actual state law) specifies that ONLY those LEOs TASKED with enforcing game laws may shoot dogs running deer. anyone else including police & sheriffs deputies are technically breaking the law. don't think for a second i wouldn't use the AR whackos to force prosecution. so forget the macho crap and fight w/ your brain.


----------



## redleg (Dec 5, 2007)

It's not legal to hunt big game in parts of Germany with out access to a tracking hound.


----------



## DDGuy (Nov 4, 2007)

In looking at the Montana law it appears to cover all the bases, yet it is simple. Utah would do well to adopt it or something very similar. 

As for hunters taking bad shots because they have a dog in camp to back them up, I don't see that happening. Like has been said already, some "hunters" are unethical and will always be unethical. The average dog isn't going to be a reliable blood tracker. Only dogs with tracking aptitude and training will be reliable. There isn't going to be a blood tracking dog in every camp. Most hunters won't even know they exist, and most dog handlers won't be willing to do the training.

The use of an on-lead trained blood tracking dog to recover lost, or more importantly wounded game, is the epitome of ethical hunting.


----------

