On Exmoor I have found the fore legs of red deer that poachers have left behind. I guess that removing excess weight seems like a good idea if you're carrying a heavy carcass any distance. I tend to agree with the "come back for it later" idea.
Lurch said:I wonder if the beast was left in the stream to keep it cool until such time as poachers could recover it.
scruff said:I hadn't thought of it this way, if it was intended to be eaten then 'fair game'....but I still think its a bit of a bad show potentially polluting the water ways (or the carcass for that matter) like this, which was my original concern.
East Yorkshire has had a fair spell of cold weather of late, alot of snow in that neck of the woods, so I wouldn't have thought it would been needed to kept in the water? or is that to ward the bugs off too?
Very well put..Klenchblaize said:All this to hopefully suggest that this unfortunate discovery will most certainly not have resulted from the actions of an experienced/committed deerstalker who would be at pains, I suggest, to demonstrate his/her understanding of "Best Practice" as defined by, to name but one organisation, The Bristish Deer Society.
How easily then are all responsible hunters and indeed bushcrafters tarred with the same brush by discoveries such a this and campfire-damaged public woodland.
Cheers
pierre girard said:No reason to keep it in the water, but if the poacher wasn't real familair with what they were doing - likely enough. I tend to think the use of plastic leads to the possiblity of an intention to return for the meat.
If they're just after meat - why not watch for roadkill? I'm not sure what it's like there, but I could easily get a deer a day on my way to work. I understand that is still illeagle there, but certainly much less likely to get everyone up in arms.
PG