Hypothetically speaking.....

Think I would have to logically evaluate the mortality of the first shot, a grazed leg or grazed anywhere shot, I'm keeping it. A boiler room shot or gut shot and I basically shot a deer on it's last legs, I'd probably give it up. A lot would depend on how the other hunter approached it too. If he's polite and respectful in his pursuits of retrieving said deer that was mortally wounded, then I would likely give him the deer.

i totally agree.

I would walk to the fence, show the deer off and tell them sorry fence hunters! Oh, thow the liver over or something so can at least eat.

Wow, didn't hear anything in the scenario about fence hunters but every wounded deer is definitely shot by a fence hunter, right.

Situations like this have been going on since man first began to hunt.
One early record comes down from Gaius, second-century Roman patriarch of modern lawmakers. “One does not become the proprietor of a wild beast which he has wounded, but which he has not effectually taken,” he wrote. “Pursuit alone vests in the sportsman no property in the animal pursued; and even pursuit accompanied by wounding is equally ineffectual for the purpose, unless the animal is actually taken.” The English later adopted this law as their own, and in time, it spread to America as well.

One early U.S. case involved two New York deer hunters. Mr. Fenning shot a buck. The deer fell but quickly rallied and disappeared with Fenning’s dogs in pursuit. Darkness was falling, so Fenning abandoned the chase and returned to camp.

Six miles from where Fenning wounded it, a second hunter, Mr. Fargo, shot the animal and finished it off. Back on the deer’s trail next morning, Fenning came upon Fargo and his kill and argued his right to the buck because he had wounded it with a shot he believed would prove fatal. Fargo believed the deer was his because he fired the killing shot. Fenning took the case to court — and lost.

“The animal was not deprived of his natural liberty so as to be within Fenning’s control when Fargo gave the finishing shot. The prize must go to Fargo for that shot.”“It is sufficient to give the hunter legal ownership,” the decision read, “if the animal has been deprived of his natural liberty so it is brought within the power and control of the pursuer. But this deer, though wounded, ran six miles.

Now, none of this answered the OP question of what would you do, but hopefully it answered the question of what might be legal. Courts seem to use the "possession is 99% of the law," ruling.

X2

Think I would have to logically evaluate the mortality of the first shot, a grazed leg or grazed anywhere shot, I'm keeping it. A boiler room shot or gut shot and I basically shot a deer on it's last legs, I'd probably give it up. A lot would depend on how the other hunter approached it too. If he's polite and respectful in his pursuits of retrieving said deer that was mortally wounded, then I would likely give him the deer.

Think I would have to logically evaluate the mortality of the first shot, a grazed leg or grazed anywhere shot, I'm keeping it. A boiler room shot or gut shot and I basically shot a deer on it's last legs, I'd probably give it up. A lot would depend on how the other hunter approached it too. If he's polite and respectful in his pursuits of retrieving said deer that was mortally wounded, then I would likely give him the deer.

Sounds pretty good until you break down the components. All too often, Hunter 1 + Hunter 2 + Trophy Buck does not equal anything Logical, particularly if it is late in the season.