deleted

[Machias]

A while back I bought the book- Tracking dogs for finding wounded deer by John Jeanneney.  www.born-to-track.com/
For anyone interested in working dogs it's an interesting read.  Even if its not legal to use a dog to bloodtrail the sections on wound identification are worth the cost of the book.

http://unitedbloodtrackers.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8&Itemid=11   LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANCE

United bloodtrackers lists us.
Washington- No tracking allowed as of 2005.

I have had to contact other websites and agencies and ask them or inform them of incorrect information, such as being allowed to carry concealed in WA without a concealed lic  if you're engaged in a lawful outdoor activity and the fact bowhunters and muzzleloaders can carry a sidearm while bowhunting or muzzleloading, so I never give much weight to books or websites.  They generally get their information from a Law Enforcement Agency.  You would think the information you get from them would be accurate, but sadly several instances they have been just plain wrong.

[copasj]

The other issue in my mind, is if you are tracking a deer that is already dead, then how can you be hunting?  You can't be "hunting" if the animal has already expired.  Of course you wouldn't really know for sure until you find it, but how can it be considered hunting if you don't have a weapon..........and the dog can't be harassing wildlife if he is on a leash..........

I wonder how it can be considered hunting as well.  In my mind the hunting is over as soon as the blood trail is identified. 

At that point it's just recovery and processing,  but my opinion doesn't mean squat.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

[bobcat]

I'm with Machias on this one. It's clear to me from reading the law, that it's legal to track a wounded animal with a leashed dog. You are not hunting, basically you're just taking the dog for a walk. Don't carry any type of weapon and it should be plain as day to any law enforcement officer, that you are not hunting.

[huntingfool7]

A while back I bought the book- Tracking dogs for finding wounded deer by John Jeanneney.  www.born-to-track.com/
For anyone interested in working dogs it's an interesting read.  Even if its not legal to use a dog to bloodtrail the sections on wound identification are worth the cost of the book.

http://unitedbloodtrackers.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8&Itemid=11   LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANCE

United bloodtrackers lists us.
Washington- No tracking allowed as of 2005.

I have had to contact other websites and agencies and ask them or inform them of incorrect information, such as being allowed to carry concealed in WA without a concealed lic  if you're engaged in a lawful outdoor activity and the fact bowhunters and muzzleloaders can carry a sidearm while bowhunting or muzzleloading, so I never give much weight to books or websites.  They generally get their information from a Law Enforcement Agency.  You would think the information you get from them would be accurate, but sadly several instances they have been just plain wrong.

I counldn't agree with Machias more.  I do think that if a Warden happened to find you bloodtrailing (unlikely) and he/she actually understood what you were doing (really unlikely), that officer would likely write a citation.  I also believe that if I went to court over this, it would most likely be dismissed.
An officer writing a citation does not mean you are guilty of a crime.

[Houndhunter]

You track any big game with a leash your open to a ticket, maybe they will maybe they won't. I got a ticket when just looking for tracks and my dog was leashed, and thats even when the regs said a leashed dog is not considered hunting. Your guilty till proven innocent, you may be "legal" but you may end up fighting a ticket in court.

[Blacktail Sniper]

You track any big game with a leash your open to a ticket, maybe they will maybe they won't. I got a ticket when just looking for tracks and my dog was leashed, and thats even when the regs said a leashed dog is not considered hunting. Your guilty till proven innocent, you may be "legal" but you may end up fighting a ticket in court.

Would you care to elaborate on the circumstances of this, final outcome, etc?   

[huntingfool7]

You track any big game with a leash your open to a ticket, maybe they will maybe they won't. I got a ticket when just looking for tracks and my dog was leashed, and thats even when the regs said a leashed dog is not considered hunting. Your guilty till proven innocent, you may be "legal" but you may end up fighting a ticket in court.

Did you go to court on this?

[Houndhunter]

no i didnt go to court, i was 18 at the time. i called the guys boss and he left me a message later saying with the information provided to him he was right to give me a ticket. it was at a later time when i read the regs and found that writing, had i known i may have got help to fight it. but at the same time it was cheaper paying the small ticket then fighting it. point is imo you will never be 100% in the clear tracking game like stated, but i woudnt let a bear go to waste that i couldnt find on my own either

[Snapshot]

I was told to my face, when I inquired a couple of years ago, by the Big Game Manager that using a bloodtrailing animal is not legal; that may be just his interpretation but he is in a position to influence what information is disseminated to people who want to know if they can use a dog or pig to find a lost animal. Yes, maybe a citation issued to an unarmed person following a bloodtrail with a leashed animal could be fought and overturned, BUT it is high time that it be CUT & DRIED by the proposing and passage of a concisely written rule that defines the rules of legal bloodtrailing. The template language is available from states that have recently sought and succeeded in having such rules enacted. It is time.

[Machias]

BUT it is high time that it be CUT & DRIED by the proposing and passage of a concisely written rule that defines the rules of legal bloodtrailing.

AMEN!

[GrousePointer]

So let me get this straight, if an organization such as NAVHDA trains dogs how to track it could be construed as illegal activity?

Sent from my Lumia 710 using Board Express

[preacherman]

I for one think that this issue should be made clear in the regs and ALLOWED. I don't care about hunting with dogs per se, but I should be able to contact any of the hound hunters I know to help find a downed deer. The area I hunt is Thick and at times even dropping on the spot they are difficult to find. I haven't lost one yet but have gotten the call several times to form a search party to find a lost deer. Whidbey island it shotgun (etc.) only so I stick to neck shots and have yet to track one of my own, but I end up tracking several a year.

There have been several occasions that I have all but stepped on one before we found it, and a few that just seem to vanish. There was a doe that I saw get hit this year, GOOD SHOT behind the shoulders, she ducked into the thick and we searched for three days. Raining hard the first night lost the blood trail at 50 yards but could smell her, and all I ever found was coyote scat with fur.

It is sad to see waste over a silly law, the greenies should even see that this does no good for anyone even the Game. Again I saw him shoot this was a textbook good shot, but bad circumstances. A trained dog could have retrieved her, I am sure.

[RifleRidge]

Our hunting party lost 2 elk and one bear.. Wish we owned a hound.. would not send the lad out to track !...

[rock]

Indiana has people use their hounds during deer season, and make a living. No one can be armed who's with the hounds. And they makes a pretty penny doing it.

[Curly]

Congrats on the successful season.