ATA LogoLive Coverage of the 2019 ATA ShowLive ATA Show CoverageDON'T MISS OUT

Why Can’t I Use My Dog?

Article contributed by Andy Bensing: President, United Blood Trackers

By now unless you have never read a hunting magazine or watched a hunting show on TV I would think every deer hunter has heard about the use of dogs to help them find a deer or other big game animal they have shot and been unable to recover on their own.  But unfortunately even though there are many dogs and handlers with the ability to help in every state of the Union, the use of dogs to recover wounded big game is still not legal in all or part of 15 states. 

Blood tracking dogs as they are typically called, even though they don’t need blood present to follow the trail of a wounded animal, have always been legal for use in many of the southern states.  However around the beginning of the 20th century most of the rest of the United States outlawed the use of dogs in any way with deer hunting.  This coincided with those states formalizing their game laws as state game agencies began regulating hunting activities.  Over hunting of whitetail deer by market hunters using dogs to actually hunt, not just recover deer, is often cited as the cause of the ban. 

The use of blood tracking dogs stayed illegal in all but a few southern states for the next 80 years or so until a movement for their use got started in New York in 1976.  Once New York  legalized the use of leashed tracking dogs for wounded deer recovery in 1985, six other states followed suit over the next few years but then things stayed quiet until about 10 years ago.  In the last 10 years 20 more states, most recently Kansas just this past August 2014, have changed their laws and regulations to allow leashed tracking dogs to be used in big game recovery.  As of the fall of 2014, 27 previously illegal states have now changed their laws bringing the national total to 37 states where a hunter now has this valuable resource. 

So what’s wrong in the 15 non-legal states?  What’s holding up legalization?  Why are some deer , bear, and other big game animals that could easily be recovered with the use of a leashed dog going to waste in Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Dakota, Nevada, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming ?   There are many reasons for sure  but after following the legalization efforts across the country and most specifically in my home state of Pennsylvania for the last 14 years, I believe the 2 major impediments to legalization in most states are ignorance and bad politics. 

IGNORANCE is easily overcome.  Here are the most common misconceptions about the use of  leashed tracking dogs and their simple clarification. 

Misconception 1.  The use of leashed tracking dogs might lead to the illegal hunting of deer with dogs.

Clarification –  Dogs that are used for hunting deer are unleashed and running free.  None of the 27 states that have legalized the use of leashed tracking dogs have gone on to later legalize hunting deer off leash with dogs nor have they experienced a problem with illegal hunting of deer with a dog under the guise of tracking a wounded deer.

Misconception 2.  The dogs will disturb other hunters.

Clarification  – How disturbing is it to have a single dog on a leash walking through the forest with a dog handler and a hunter walking single file right behind him as he follows the footsteps the deer took earlier?  Compare that to a single hunter or perhaps the hunter and 4 or 5 buddies grid searching the forest or field for hours when the blood trail disappears.  Leashed tracking dogs almost never bark on the trail and the very small, less than 1% that do, only bark when they find the quarry at the end of the trail. 

Misconception 3.  There might be throngs of handlers using untrained dogs in the field.

Clarification – This has not ever been a problem in any state.   Actually, the opposite is true.  During the height of deer season trackers are the busiest and some hunters can’t be helped due to the lack of enough dogs to go around.   The use of leashed tracking dogs is self-limiting in regards to untrained dogs and quite frankly poorly skilled handlers as well.  Following a dog around on a leash through thick and thin and over hill and dale gets pretty uncomfortable pretty quick if the dog is not doing a good job and you are not finding anything.  These trackers quit the sport quickly or get better training for themselves and their dogs.   Hunters in a geographic area also figure out pretty quickly who are the capable teams and only call on the handlers with a successful reputation.

Misconception 4 – The dogs will chase healthy deer. 

Clarification – First of all the dogs are on a leash so it is impossible for them to actually “ chase” a deer unless the dog’s handler is a world class cross country athlete.  Putting that aside, much like the clarification for number 3 above, tracking the wrong healthy deer by mistake is self-limiting.  The dogs are trained to follow the track of only the specific wounded deer they are originally put on.  There is no reward at the end for the handler or dog if the wrong healthy deer is followed.  A dog that is not good at staying on the correct deer is no fun for the dog’s handler and quickly is left at home for a dog that is better. 

Misconception 5.  The availability of tracking dogs will increase the amount of unethical shots hunters will take.

Clarification – Unethical hunters are taking those marginal shots right now and hoping for the best.  Dogs are not going to change that.  A hunter takes ethical shots or he doesn’t.  In 14 years of handling blood tracking dogs I have spoken directly to over 1,000 hunters who have called me for help in locating a wounded animal.  As they describe to me what has happened I can assure you that some of them describe what most hunters would consider an unethical shot but I have never once gotten the impression  they took the shot because they knew if it went wrong a dog could help them out.  Actually, when most tracking dog handlers speak to hunters who have taken poor shots, they take the opportunity to try and educate the hunters why they should not have taken the shot in the first place.

Misconception 6.  Blood tracking dogs are just one more new gadget to take the challenge out of hunting and make it easier.

Clarification  – Tracking dogs are not anything new.  The use of dogs to recover wounded big game goes back 100’s of years to well before the middle ages from our traditional European hunting roots where is has always been the way.  It is only in the last 100 years in just some parts of the United States where the tradition was lost.  Restarting an old tradition is certainly not something new.  Especially when some parts of the country never stopped.

Secondly, and most frustrating to me personally, POLITICS often rears its ugly head even after the common misconceptions have been addressed.  Here are some typical examples of how politics can hold up legalization.

Wildlife law enforcement agencies within a state sometimes erroneously believe tracking dogs will somehow make their jobs more difficult and vigorously work in the political shadows to defeat it.  Evidence to the contrary is often just ignored.  Interestingly, no matter how the tracking regulations in each new legalized state have been written, leashed tracking dog programs have caused no problems for hunters or Law Enforcement in those states.  There is no demonstrable down side to any leashed tracking dog program anywhere.

In some states, not even all of the sportsmen’s clubs who represent the hunters of the state get on board right away.  They all have an agenda of items they want to accomplish.  Legalization of leashed tracking dogs often starts out low on that list.  They don’t want to waste any political “chips” they might have on the issue.  I’ve even seen rifle hunting organizations initially against leashed tracking dogs because they perceived them as another advantage to archery hunters who get to hunt earlier in the year than they do.  Crazy, isn’t it? 

Then there is the State government politics.  In the luckier states, only regulations directly controlled by the wildlife management agencies need to be changed.  In those scenarios it typically only takes the convincing of a few key individuals to get the regulations changed but even here sometimes intradepartmental political conflicts can arise. 

It is hard enough to change a bureaucratic regulation within a state but when an actual state law has to be changed, that process can get particularly difficult.  I will use my own efforts for legalization in my home state of PA as a specific example but PA is not alone with this type of political problem.  Myself and others have been diligently working for the past 14 years to legalize leashed tracking dogs in PA.  We have had six Bills introduced over that time.  Three of those Bills actually made it through the quagmire of the committee process and passed unanimously or within 1 or 2 votes of unanimously on the floor of the State House of Representatives.   Five of those bills died in committee at the end of legislative session either in the House where they started or the in the Senate where they were not voted on.  Our 6th Bill which was voted unanimously through the House of Representatives just last year appears to be headed for the same fate as the rest.  It looks like it will die in the State Senate Game and Fisheries committee again this year even though we have the overwhelming support of the individual hunters in the state as well as the support of all the Major Sportsman’s Associations.  Over the last 14 years we have sent countless letters and information packets to all the legislators.  We have made presentations at committee meetings, phoned and met personally with all the Senators, Representative and their aides many times.  We have done everything humanly possible to educate them and answer their questions. Yet after 14 years of effort our current bill , HB451, has been discussed in committee on 3 separate occasions in the last year and a half and still languishes in that committee without a vote due to what could only be called bad politics.  It seems like it always boils down to one or two overly powerful, seniority entrenched politicians playing political football with our bill with little or no regard to what the vast majority of constituent hunters in the state desire.

Luckily hunters in 27 states have been able to overcome the above challenges and get leashed tracking dogs legalized in their state. These hunters have the obvious benefit of an additional tool to recover their game but more importantly they are demonstrating to the non-hunting public that hunters take all ethical means possible to retrieve game that has been shot.  In today’s society our hunting traditions are often under attack.  Anything we can do to put a more positive light on hunting to the general public is a plus for the survival of our hunting heritage.  Leashed tracking dogs can only help to strengthen the public’s attitude in a very positive way.

If you want to learn more about  the use of tracking dogs for big game recovery or if you are looking for a list of tracking dog handlers in your area go to www.unitedbloodtrackers.org  the website of the national organization for the promotion of their use.

Comments

  1. Is it just me or is the dog in the first pic wearing a shock collar? What need is there if the dog is on a leash? Or is that considered an "e leash?" I am 100% for using dogs to track game, don't get me wrong.

    Reply
    • It isn’t a shock collar. Blood tracking dogs are generally run with thicker collars or harnesses to distribute the force over a larger area so they don’t hurt their necks.

      Reply
    • What you’re seeing might be a GPS collar… A lot of dog handlers put them on their dogs, in case something unforeseen happens… A handler trips and looses grip of the leash, or the snap unhookes… Those occasions are extremely rare and just purely extra precaution .

      Reply
      • Think of the wild boar hunters in the south those dogs are armored with body armor and thick collars with GPS to hunt the boar and when found need to be able to fight off the boar til hunter arrives

        Reply
  2. It could be a walkie talkie collar, my dog has one.

    Reply
  3. Josh Raley says:

    What kind of dog is that in the pictures?

    Reply
  4. I sure wish we could use them in WV handy tool to have.

    Reply
  5. Rather-b-bowhunting says:

    I strongly disagree w the no blood dog rule..
    I think we as bownters owe it to the animal to follow
    Up on the shot, and do everything we can to recover the animal
    200 inch buck or doe… We'd all love if the deer dropped over on arrow impact, sure we'd all love that. But rarely the case

    Reply
  6. What about California. Dogs are banned except for Duck hunting. Even outlawed it against bear hunting last year.

    Reply
  7. Lee Behrens says:

    I have legally tracked and recovered deer in NY State for 20 years. I am eagerly awaiting the results of the legislature in Pennsylvania to finally vote and make it legal there. Thanks to the dogged pursuit of Andy Bensing forwarding the cause there.

    Reply
  8. Grahambow says:

    How about post the names of those politicians standing in the way of getting laws like this passed? I diligently practice shooting my bow to make the most ethical shot possible when presented with the opportunity. However, things happen and occasionally the shot doesn’t hit its mark. Times like these a tracking dog would priceless! PA has some of the most outdated laws in regards to hunting!

    Reply
  9. ALAN FINNEY says:

    Where does it say that tracking is illegal in Nevada? I called the dept of wildlife and asked. They said you can’t use them to harass or drive the Deer or Elk.
    NAC 503.147 Hunting with a dog. (NRS 501.105, 501.181, 503.150) It is unlawful to hunt,
    chase or pursue:
    1. Any black bear or mountain lion with a dog except during the open season, in an open
    management area and under the authority of a hunting license and:
    (a) A black bear tag, if the person is hunting, chasing or pursuing a black bear; or
    (b) A mountain lion tag, if the person is hunting, chasing or pursuing a mountain lion.
    2. Any fur-bearing mammal with a dog except during the open season and under the
    authority of a trapping license.
    3. Any wild turkey with a dog from March 1 through June 30 of any year.

    Reply
    • developer says:

      The law may have changed since this article was written, in 2014.

      Reply
  10. Bruce Brandsness says:

    Oregon has the tightest hunting laws I have ever seen and I have lived here for 64 years and have been hunting for 52! Dogs will really help in getting deer elk lopes but that will never happen here as I stated above! It’s just ignorant for this state to do what they are doing from elk to birds! We get a 7 day hunt on bandtails and can harvest 4 total and then they get to fly by California and they get 10 per day really? We are protecting them but no other state is such as Mexico can kill as many as they want, why is Oregon so ignorant? Geese can’t shoot duskys but other states can! It’s very messed up! I would love to use my dog yo track a wounded deer elk while bow hunting instead of not finding it and feeding the birds coyotes and what ever wants to eat the animal!!! Oregon change the laws!!!

    Reply

Speak Your Mind

*