# Peoples opinions on the law shooting a deer and the wife taging it in.



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

When I go to the Athens and other areas. During deer season a lot of the locals shot deer and have there wife, father or Grandfather or so on tag there deer in. I don't have that big of a problem since they get taged in and recorded and paid for the tag and licenses. 

Why is it such a big deal on who tages it?

I never understood the importance of it.


----------



## General*Washington (Nov 30, 2008)

The following is from the regulations:


*A Deer Hunter CANNOT do any of the following:

Carry the deer permit of another person.*


My interpretation is you have to tag your own deer. You have to check your own deer in at the check station, after reading above, looks like you have to tag it yourself too. Doesn't matter why, it's just the way it is.


----------



## M.Magis (Apr 5, 2004)

I have to agree. Trying to decifer the reasoning of every law in the books is just pointless. Yes, people have family members tag in deer, and yes it very much illegal. One could make the argument that as long as it's tagged in it shouldn't matter, and I have a hard time disagreeing with that. But, it's still not legal and that's all that matters.


----------



## swantucky (Dec 21, 2004)

I agree with the above posters it is illegal.

As far as why my first guess with Ohio being a one buck state it is to protect the bucks. If you could just have a wife, friend, whatever tag your deer what would keep someone from shooting 3,6, 10 bucks a year. We would not have the trophies we do in this state if that were the case.


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

I am aware of it being Illegal. Yes, I do want to discuss the reason for it. Ever heard of Question authority? Is this an old law from the 60's when it was buck only. There is enormas #'s of deer in the deer heard. and it only gets bigger and bigger. What we can't discuss it General


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

aha! another can of worms for cabin fever discussion
i tend to aggre with magis.i know it happens quite a bit,not only with spouses,but others,but law is law.
that said,i really don't see great harm in using another's tag under certain circumstances.
in a group situation(2 or more)if all are hunting together on private land,if one person kills a deer,and for some reason,another person agrees to tag it/check it,and sit out the rest of the season,i really don't see the harm in it.anyone who participates in drives knows this is not an uncommon practice.there are probably a lot more people who do it than will admit to it though 
then there are the landowner permits.dad goes out and kills 7 deer and mom and the kids all make out a landowner's permit and take the deer to the check in station.same basic deal,which also happens alot,except the family didn't actually participate in the hunt.

all that said,be safe,follow the law,and you will have no problems


----------



## M.Magis (Apr 5, 2004)

> Is this an old law from the 60's when it was buck only.


No, this is law in almost every state in the country. Even in states where party hunting is legal, they typically require the person tagging the deer to at least be within "shouting distance". It's more of a fairness law I believe. This law will *never* change.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

With the number of deer that you are permitted to take per person in the state now it would seem that the only reason one would do that is to double up on the bucks. Personally I think it is a big no-no. I can't help but think that the guys that would do that would also be the same ones that would break or stretch every law. If they ignore that one then they have no problem ignoring the legal hours, property lines, 3 shots per gun, etc.

What ever happened to just simply following the law?


----------



## freyedknot (Apr 10, 2004)

they just shoot it and have others tag it for more deer meet.that is illegal. the OTHERS never set foot in the woods !


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

> With the number of deer that you are permitted to take per person in the state now it would seem that the only reason one would do that is to double up on the bucks


though that could be one motive,i kida doubt it is the number one.i think most are just hunting for meat for the gang,and take many more does than bucks.again,i'm not condoning,but looking at the reasons for it.lots of people may only get one day to hunt and will give up his tag for some meat that he may not get a chance at.that is just one reason people may have,but i still believe overall,it's more related to meat than antlers.just like the landowner's deal.he just wants to feed the family.if they don't hunt,he can still(though not legal)simply have family members tag and check "extra" deer.


----------



## bgpark1 (Apr 23, 2004)

kill em all... let god sort them out. 

I am concerned with the ever increasing #'s allowed to be taken legally or in such circumstances being discussed that the deer population could drop dramatically and rather quickly. More does taken this year through anterless permits mean less deer and offspring next year... one doe out this season means 3 less next... since most does i see sport 2 little ones... take that out 5 -6 years... it could have a serious impact on the #'s. 

Just food for thought.


----------



## Fish-N-Fool (Apr 12, 2004)

Actually - all the folks I know of doing this indeed are taking "extra" antlered deer. The ones I know of simply can't pass a shot at a buck (or like the idea of taking 2-3 nice ones if they get the chance) and for some darn reason won't shoot does Just happens the worst offender of this I've heard of doesn't eat venison - go figure 

The limits are liberal enough that you can fill a deep freezer with meat and feed a family of 5-6 without ever breaking the law. 

I like the laws the way they are now - one antlered deer per season. I am not against a man killing a deer for somebody else - say your family member is injured or elderly. I am against taking multiple bucks as it doesn't help with population control and IMO we should protect our "big buck" resource in OH.
If they could come up with a system of a doe only third party tag I would have no problems with it.

Until they change the law - follow the rules!


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

misfit said:


> though that could be one motive,i kida doubt it is the number one.i think most are just hunting for meat for the gang,and take many more does than bucks.again,i'm not condoning,but looking at the reasons for it.lots of people may only get one day to hunt and will give up his tag for some meat that he may not get a chance at.that is just one reason people may have,but i still believe overall,it's more related to meat than antlers.just like the landowner's deal.he just wants to feed the family.if they don't hunt,he can still(though not legal)simply have family members tag and check "extra" deer.


I am sure you may be right on the motive in some cases where someone may have been unsuccessful with his own tag but having the spouse tag one costs just the same as tagging it yourself.

And as far as the landowners go that is a no cost issue anyway as they should be tagging all of them on landowner tags.

I just think very few folks are going above the 3 deer that they are allowed in our zone (or 6 with the extra antlerless tags). I could tag 6 for my family which is far more than we will eat. My two oldest boys were hunting this year as well. We could have aimed for 18 of them. Ideally 2-3 nice size deer for us are more than enough.


----------



## rockson (Nov 14, 2008)

In NY you cannot kill a buck with the extra deer tag. But you can sign it over to another licensed hunted, in some areas you can't shoot a buck with less than 3-points on one side


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

brian,costs are really not the issue.at least in what i was saying.my point was "actual" hunters tagging for one another,where they all share the meat and not the guy who buys the wife who doesn't hunt, a tag just to double dip.
same for the landowner permits.i know they don't cost,but i was just giving a scenario where the family doesn't hunt,but still use the permit law for dad to tag more deer.i do know people who do it.
i really am not that much against a guy feeding his family,but as you pointed out,not many families will eat 18 in a year 
some may think the limits are too liberal,but with the high density,they do need to be controlled.


----------



## General*Washington (Nov 30, 2008)

wildman said:


> What we can't discuss it General


Man, I never said you can't discuss it....discuss it, geez. Question authority too while you're at it. I was just saying it's the law, follow it.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Misfit,

With hunters in the appropriate zones being able to purchase tags and take 4 deer per person the tag abuse is not for more meat it is for the harvesting of multiple bucks for sure. I've heard and seen this practice for many moons. Unless a guy wants more than his 4 legal deer to eat for the family there is no reason to buy mommy a hunting license and deer tag unless it's for mommy to check in a buck

The exception would be deer tagged in with landowner tags, then everyone down to the newborn kills a deer each year.


----------



## wannabe (Dec 24, 2007)

This could be good for the people who don't see any deer.The people shooting extra bucks are leaving the does to breed.Thus creating more deer for next years complainers.


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

well,i'll concede to you,kim.that could be more prevalent than i might have thought.i kinda forget about the multiple deer limits nowadays.i don't think i've hunted since it was changed fro 2 deer.


----------



## Fishstix (Aug 16, 2005)

Just wait until they go to the automated call in system. People will be taking deer home and not calling them in. All I am saying is that this will give them more reason to shoot more deer. Once they get the deer home, is it really necessary to call it in? That will go through many individuals minds.


----------



## Bassnpro1 (Apr 6, 2004)

Is that any different than getting it home now and driving out to get it checked in?


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

Oh General I was just pushing buttons..

I am one of those people that hunt urban areas so the amount of deer that I can shot is ridicules. That being said I don't believe that shooting more bucks than 1 is right. I shot a buck one year that I thought was bigger than it was and wished I could take it back but I was great full for the opportunity and was still proud. I just wish I would of let it go for next year. I know people that would do what ever they could to still be able to get that trophy It doesn't matter to me I like to duck hunt. The trophy deer I have several.

With that being said 
BKR IS RIGHT ON but those are the type guys that wouldn't even tag them in.

Then again I can see it on the other side if someone i know that hunts buys a license and isn't able to hunt why can't i shoot a deer for him if I'm good at it and he isn't or doesn't have time. a license and tag has been purchased why does it matter who shoots it? yes some one could take advantage of it but does it really matter? 

I like the laws the way they are and I'm being the devils adv. I kind of see both sides. I had this argument with one of the locals in Athens county someone that I've hunted with for a while and yes a friend he just looks at thing different than me. That was the hole reason I wrote this thread


----------



## Fishstix (Aug 16, 2005)

Bassnpro1 said:


> Is that any different than getting it home now and driving out to get it checked in?


No there really isn't a difference. I have hunted in North Carolina the past 3 seasons and they have the call in system. The guy I hunt off of told me that their are many people who don't even call in their kills, they just take them home and butcher them themselves. I sure this still takes place even now.

It will be a lot easier for someone to have their wife call them was what I was really getting at.


----------



## Procraft180 (Apr 10, 2008)

I would have to agree with the law on this one at all, but there was one case that I had last year that just blew my mind, I was hunting the youth season with a friend of mine, his dad and myself. Well a doe came walking up so I took a shot at her with my bow, hit her just behind her front leg she ran about 100 yards from my stand right passed my buddy and I heard a gun shot. Well what had happened was she ran right up to him and shot it *not seeing my arrow since it had fallen out*. Well we get to the tagging station, and the person doing the checking asked me which one of us shot it. Well I wasn't sure what the hell to tell her. Well I ended up tagging but would this be a "special circumstance" for someone else to tag the deer since I shot it first but he dropped it.


----------



## icefisherman4life (Aug 5, 2007)

one of the farms i hunt the landowner told me you can tag in 6 deer with my landowner tags to shoot does. im not gonna lie to you i have my legal tags but if this guy is gonna tag my deer for me in his name and i dont have to pay for tags im gonna do it. the meat wont go to waste either. yall prolly dont agree with me on this one but im just gonna be honest. and i agree with the earlier post about calling in the deer. i think thats a bad idea.


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

> Well I ended up tagging but would this be a "special circumstance" for someone else to tag the deer since I shot it first but he dropped it.


it's not a special circumstance.the law states that the person who makes the killing shot tags the deer.technically,in this case he should have tagged it.


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

The call-in system is not going to change anything on the deer kill. Those who choose to bend the law at that time will/are doing it currently. The requirement will be no different for proof of legal tagging at that time than it is now. The only difference is that you will not have a metal tag affixed to the deer with the tag number. If you are stopped by a law officer you will still need to provide the number you obtained from the call-in just the same as you would have to show the metal tag.

I believe the example of the folks hunting in NC simply illustrates some guys using the call-in system as an excuse to violate the law. I would bet that if they had the check-in system they would still be avoiding it as well.


----------



## wildman (Sep 3, 2008)

I have absolutely no problem with what ice fisherman put down if someone whats you to tag a deer for them i don't understand why they can't. 
But If that door was opened the I bet it would be taken advantage of. 

Ex: bring me a license and tag and for $30 I will bring you 2 bags of deer meat.

Now grant it one can not profit off of game animals. but there is always some one to push the envelop


----------



## Wannabitawerm (Apr 13, 2004)

I told my buddy, since he is the only one who eats deer in his house, and he is looking for a buck this year, if he sees a big doe, take the shot. I will pay for the processing, and use my tag if he wants, because I'm all about meat in the freezer. My family and I think it is more important to fill the freezer as we all love venison. Don't get me wrong, I would love to get a buck this year, but meat is my number one goal. I've got 6 mouths to feed and it takes a lot off our grocery bill when we have 50 to 60 lbs of deer in the freezer. I won't do it for a buck, and I would rather make the kill myself.

Just being honest here folks. Feel free to bash me if you want, but working afternoons and keeping the wife happy cuts into my hunting time. I hate to buy the tags and never use them. That's money that could've went to groceries or gas. I pay enough tax money to the state, If I buy my tags, I want to use them. Just getting my moneys' worth.


----------



## Procraft180 (Apr 10, 2008)

Well as far as my situation I hope I didn't make the wrong decision both of them were "kill shots" just one of them finished her off. Thats the reason I asked to see in case next time it does happen I know the legal way. I read the book but was unsure at the time what to do about that. Thanks for the info.


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

> both of them were "kill shots" just one of them finished her off.


there is a diffence between a shot that shoulda/woulda/coulda killed,and the shot that actually did kill
if the deer was still alive,you did not technically/legally make the killing shot.your buddy did.in your words.."he finished her off". 
i'm not giving you a hard time.just quoting the law as it's written/intended.i don't really see what you did as anything bad under the circumstances,but the game warden may or may not see it the same way.


----------



## big_mike (Aug 2, 2006)

Wannabitawerm said:


> I told my buddy, since he is the only one who eats deer in his house, and he is looking for a buck this year, if he sees a big doe, take the shot. I will pay for the processing, and use my tag if he wants, because I'm all about meat in the freezer. My family and I think it is more important to fill the freezer as we all love venison. Don't get me wrong, I would love to get a buck this year, but meat is my number one goal. I've got 6 mouths to feed and it takes a lot off our grocery bill when we have 50 to 60 lbs of deer in the freezer. I won't do it for a buck, and I would rather make the kill myself.
> 
> Just being honest here folks. Feel free to bash me if you want, but working afternoons and keeping the wife happy cuts into my hunting time. I hate to buy the tags and never use them. That's money that could've went to groceries or gas. I pay enough tax money to the state, If I buy my tags, I want to use them. Just getting my moneys' worth.




How much Food could you buy for $125.00. That is the starting fine for what you just described. Your willing to risk paying a $125.00 fine so you don't "WASTE" your deer tag. If you use your tag on someone's deer other than the one you shot, be prepared down the road to pay a fine. I agree, it is bullcrap that we can't use our tags the way we want, but it is the law.


----------



## Bassnpro1 (Apr 6, 2004)

big_mike said:


> How much Food could you buy for $125.00. That is the starting fine for what you just described. Your willing to risk paying a $125.00 fine so you don't "WASTE" your deer tag. I am speaking from experience here folks. If you use your tag on someone's deer other than the one you shot, be prepared down the road to pay a fine. I agree, it is bullcrap that we can't use our tags the way we want, but it is the law.


I agree that it is wrong, but unless someone snitches on you, there is almost no way to detect this. Unless you are dumb enough to use his tag and your name. If you have two people and one guy shoots a deer and the other guy tags it in with his tag and gives you the meat, there is no way of being caught, unless someone was watching, one of you two tell on yourselves, or God turns you in. As has been said before, people will always bend rules and cut corners and break laws, so the only thing you have to worry about is yourself and what you do if you see something happen.

I do not condone this activity and have never done this, just pointing it out.


----------



## misfit (Apr 5, 2004)

> If I buy my tags, I want to use them. Just getting my moneys' worth.


i'm not gonna bash anyone,but will give an opinion.the statement above just doesn't jive.what you said in your other post was you asked someone else to use your tags.if you don't have time or money to hunt,then why waste it on tags to begin with?there's at least $44 you could spend on food.that's getting your money's worth without breaking the law,and asking your buddy to do the same.so not only are you setting yourself up for possible prosecution,you're asking your buddy to commit a crime for your convenience.all for some lousy venison?
i'm glad i'm not your buddy,cause if you'd made that proposition to me,i'd have told you to wizz up a frozen rope


----------



## bkr43050 (Apr 5, 2004)

Or you can ask a buddy to buy an additional tag for himself and you will pay for it. Then the buddy shoots the deer on his own tag and simply gives the deer to you. It accomplishes the same thing but does it in a legal way.


----------



## Procraft180 (Apr 10, 2008)

misfit said:


> there is a diffence between a shot that shoulda/woulda/coulda killed,and the shot that actually did kill
> if the deer was still alive,you did not technically/legally make the killing shot.your buddy did.in your words.."he finished her off".
> i'm not giving you a hard time.just quoting the law as it's written/intended.i don't really see what you did as anything bad under the circumstances,but the game warden may or may not see it the same way.


Well thanks misft for the help, now i know next time what to do this time was an honest mistake and i see where you are coming from and completely agree with you on the shoulda/woulda/coulda kill. He killed here therefore he should have tagged it in but the good news is that it was and not like some other people who shoot them and either let them lie or don't even tag them in. Thanks for the help.


----------



## falcon2082 (Jun 16, 2008)

Wannabitawerm said:


> I told my buddy, since he is the only one who eats deer in his house, and he is looking for a buck this year, if he sees a big doe, take the shot. I will pay for the processing, and use my tag if he wants, because I'm all about meat in the freezer. My family and I think it is more important to fill the freezer as we all love venison. Don't get me wrong, I would love to get a buck this year, but meat is my number one goal. I've got 6 mouths to feed and it takes a lot off our grocery bill when we have 50 to 60 lbs of deer in the freezer. I won't do it for a buck, and I would rather make the kill myself.
> 
> Just being honest here folks. Feel free to bash me if you want, but working afternoons and keeping the wife happy cuts into my hunting time. I hate to buy the tags and never use them. That's money that could've went to groceries or gas. I pay enough tax money to the state, If I buy my tags, I want to use them. Just getting my moneys' worth.


Wanna, below is your post from the SLOB HUNTERS thread:

I agree with you 100&#37; big mike. I would love to be part of a drive, but I want to do it right. With permission and people I know and trust. If anyone wasn't legal, I would turn them in myself. I believe firmly in our right and priviledge to hunt, but we need to be safe, responsible, law-abiding, rational hunters who respect the land and others rights in the process.

It is after all, a PRIVILEDGE and I thank the Lord everyday for the ability and opportunity to enjoy our resources. Be safe guys.


----------



## big_mike (Aug 2, 2006)

falcon2082 said:


> Wanna, below is your post from the SLOB HUNTERS thread:
> 
> I agree with you 100&#37; big mike. I would love to be part of a drive, but I want to do it right. With permission and people I know and trust. If anyone wasn't legal, I would turn them in myself. I believe firmly in our right and priviledge to hunt, but we need to be safe, responsible, law-abiding, rational hunters who respect the land and others rights in the process.
> 
> It is after all, a PRIVILEDGE and I thank the Lord everyday for the ability and opportunity to enjoy our resources. Be safe guys.


That is just Classic. Thats Funny, I don't care who you are. Falcon2082, you have one heck of a memory. I can't keep from laughing.


----------



## Bonemann (Jan 28, 2008)

There are alot of laws and not every one follows them for different reasons.

I'm not supposed to speed, so if an officer asked me if I do I would say no.
I'm not supposed to tag a deer some one else has downed if an officer asked me I would say no.

I did get where I was going safely and I do have a deer in the freezer from this season. I didn't speed to get there and I shot that deer myself.

If the law stops people from taking multiple bucks then it has worked if another has been broken to put food on the table so be it.


----------



## c. j. stone (Sep 24, 2006)

I didn't read all the responses to this one but I did just read the latest issue of the Fish and Field Report(over the counter outdoor newpaper) and there were two lenthy articles about the ODNR busting two major Poaching Rings in the state. They listed every offender, the charges against them, and punishments-in order from the most(worst offences/offenders) to the least. Several of the last names of some of the females were the same as some of the men and some of their particular charges were for "illegally tagging deer". Now I realize these are extreme cases but all of these people have to be very unhappy today about how the STATE INTERPRETS(and Enforces) IT'S GAME LAWS-and the "rights" of certain (hunters?) to do as they damn well please!!


----------



## FishinDawg (Mar 9, 2005)

J/K


It's against the law, so NO. Laws are made for a reason, Just becuase you dont agree dosent mean you have the right to break it. 

Things always start out with little things like using my wifes tag this Year, than again next years and also using my daughters to, following year it's wifes tag, daughters tag and sisters tag, people dont know when to stop, and before long the law biding hunters in Ohio have nothing to hunt because the pochers killed everything. 

It's against the law and if anybody does this they should not consider themselves hunters, there pochers, plain & simple. my hope is that they get caught and pay a health fine. 

If wives & daughters want to use thier tag...here's an idea take them with you, spend a day with your wife or even your daughter in the woods hunting. do it legally.


----------



## Wannabitawerm (Apr 13, 2004)

I was talking to my buddy about this thread. I figured I would get bashed, but my buddy thought I should clarify something. My buddy told me if he shoots a deer, he's tagging it. If I wanted it, I would pay for processing and buy him a new tag. I should also state, I WOULD HAVE TO BE IN THE WOODS WITH HIM FOR THAT SENARIO TO PLAY OUT. I understand the importance of following the rules and abiding by the laws. I apologize for my ignorance. My statements in one post contradicted itself in another. I also apologize to any fellow OGF members who may have been misled by my responses.

Be careful if you're goin' out this weekend.


----------

