Hunting season will soon be with us and sometimes hunters have arguments about who owns those trophy antlers. I came across two court cases dealing with that issue.
In a 1998 Alberta case, M vs. B, the issue was ownership of elk antlers scoring 386 4/8 points on the Boone and Crockett Club scale. This scale is regarded by trophy hunters as an official score based on an objective system that classifies length, spread, mass and number and lengths of ends or points.
M had booked with a firm of well-known guides to take him into the area east of the Rocky Mountains. His goal was to get a trophy animal. The night before the hunt, B appeared in camp, said that he was hunting for food and asked if he could join the hunt. The guide asked M, who agreed that B could join the hunt as long as M had first choice of animal to shoot.
Read Also
Nutritious pork packed with vitamins, essential minerals
Recipes for pork
The next morning the party came across a herd of six elk. Each hunter chose an elk, M fired first, then B fired. Prior to shooting each hunter had indicated the elk that was his target. Two elk were killed, one being the trophy one.
The judge noted “B got to the big elk first and made to claim it ….When M had slid down the … snow-covered hill he found that B had tagged the first elk and was claiming it as his own. That elk was the trophy elk. M thought there had been a mistake, a mixup and said so, but was not prepared to fight for it.”
However, the guide had videotaped the shooting and warned B there might be a problem, telling B not to tag the elk. Later, when B saw the video, he returned the antlers to M and they shook hands. However, later B changed his mind and seized the antlers from M’s truck.
So the judge had to decide who shot the trophy elk. Considering the videotape, the witnesses and B’s “demeanor” (the judge noted B was quick to call the guide a liar), the decision was in favour of M.
In a 1997 Saskatchewan case, C vs. Queen, C claimed that he shot a huge bull elk and more importantly was the owner of the antlers thatconservation officers had seized. He was hunting with two companions, R and J. While his companions left on foot, C remained in the truck. He saw an elk and shot it. While the elk fell, it regained its footing and staggered into the bush. C followed it and shot it dead.
As it was dark, C and his companions, who returned, agreed they would pick up the elk the next day. C was working so his companions went alone. They returned saying they could not find the carcass.
However, C later heard that someone in a blue van had given half a carcass to another individual. He suspected one of his companions, R. He complained to a conservation officer that R would probably try to sell the antlers. In a sting operation, R sold a set of large antlers to an undercover officer for $400. The companion was charged with trafficking in wildlife.
C then sued for the antlers, claiming they were from the elk he shot. The other companion, J, testified on behalf of the crown that this was from an elk he shot at a later date. Further he recalled the hunt as significant because it was his first kill and an “overwhelming experience.”
The judge found that both parties were credible witnesses, but by the rules of evidence C had not established his claim on a balance of probabilities.
What is it that drives people to court over antlers? Perhaps in the words of the Alberta judge, “Boone and Crockett turns grown men into children.”
Don Purich is a former practising lawyer who is now involved in publishing, teaching and writing about legal issues. His columns are intended as general advice only. Individuals are encouraged to seek other opinions and/or personal counsel when dealing with legal matters.
