Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: Monster Moose scoring by the book (the only one that counts)

  1. #1
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,061

    Default Monster Moose scoring by the book (the only one that counts)

    There are 2 good pics of large moose racks on the Monster Moose thread. Grizzlykiller lists the B&C score for each one. They are quite different racks and it is interesting why they score differently.
    So who has some good moose rack photos? Post them here and if you have a score for it, post that also.
    Hopefully our resident experts can clue us in on what to look for in a high scoring moose vs. one that looks big.
    If any archers have large moose photos and want to speak about the P&Y book, your welcome too. I'd be interested to hear if there's a difference in the P&Y scoring system than the B&c.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  2. #2
    Member Casper50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sterling
    Posts
    588

    Default A friend's monster moose!!

    A friend took this moose last September across the inlet from Soldotna. 74" wide green score would place it about 54 in B&C.





    www.mikesbritishguns.us

  3. #3
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,061

    Default

    Cool photo. What was the green and official score?
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  4. #4
    Member PatrickH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    253

    Default Alternate measure

    I prefer the one-freezer, two-freezer, three-freezer scoring method. However I am not opposed to getting a giant rack too.
    Perhaps someone can explain to me why anyone cares how someone else "scores" a rack. A giant rack is obvious. Differences in how the rack is made up will always favor one formation over another regardless of how large the animal is. Why are people willing to spend tons of cash to get that rack that is just an inch or two larger than someone elses? Is that a true measure of the hunter, the animal or the hunt?
    Patrick

  5. #5

    Default moose

    Casper:
    Would that be Dr. Bob? Did he enter it in B&C? Nice moose.

  6. #6
    Member Casper50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sterling
    Posts
    588

    Default

    That's him. The last time that I talked to him he said he wasn't going to bother entering it in the book.

  7. #7
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,061

    Default

    Scoring a rack, horns, or a skull, is just one groups means of how to determine how large one animal is compared to another. Some may use it as a means to brag, but I think most do not. I've guided moose and bear hunters, and most have not been looking for something to brag about. Competition is part of normal human behavior. Having a recognized means to compare one animal against another is part of the "competition".
    In general, animals with large racks or horns are healthy animals. If one seeks nutrition from his kill, the larger animals are the ones to look for. Since large racks, horns generally translate to large body size, taking bragging size racks gives the hunter more for his money.
    While other predators may take the sick, weak, young, etc., humans have more than likely sought the larger, healthier animals to better provide for themselves. if we were truly hunting for survival, taking the largest, healthiest animal of the species sought would just be plain commen sense. Scoring racks and horns gives us a means, to some degree, in judging whose animal was the healthiest.
    I don't see a problem with that.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  8. #8

    Default World Record Bull?

    Heres a pic I saw on another site. Supposedly its a world record bull taken in Russia, Kamchatka Peninsula. Supposedly this beast was 15 feet tall at the shoulders.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  9. #9
    Member dwhunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas/Alaska
    Posts
    468

    Default PatrickH

    You would not believe what some folks will pay for a monster whitetail down in Texas. They breed these deer for giant racks and charge based on score, some of these fenced ranches go upward of 15k for a monster. I see someone breeding the next world receord very soon and then throwing a ridiculous price on it for someone to shoot it inside the fence.

    I have a friend that has 3 rams in the exotic record book, he raised them until they would qualify and then shot them. His thing, not mine.

    Each animal I have ever taken is a trophy in my mind because of what I went through to get it, the buddies with me at the time etc. I could care less what others think about it let alone a record book.

    I do not have a problem with a book or scoring system as long as fenced hunts etc are not included, I really enjoy hearing about that one hunter while smoking on his stand, without scent blocking clothing bust the really big one on public land.

    Doug

  10. #10

    Default Casper 50- Thanks for sharing the pic!

    Great moose! What a thrill to just glimpse such a giant. Thanks for sharing the pic. Was he guided, transported or a DIY hunt?
    Very best,
    TWA

  11. #11
    Member Grizzlykiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nome Alaska
    Posts
    71

    Default Big Daddy Cool....

    Lots of words to ponder. The question was what to look for in big bulls?
    I look for the fat, long palms with at least 12 points on a side. Lack of huge spread is one measurement that can be substituted with wide long palms and lots of points.
    There is a bull in Boone and Crockett's all time book with a spread of 54 3/8 that scores 228 5/8.
    Another scores 223 7/8 , just shy of the all time book with a FIFTY ONE 1/8 spread.
    There are over forty bull moose listed that score better than 210, the Awards book minimum, with a spread in the fifty inch range.
    Obviously spread is *****in, but not the only thing. Symmetry is the key. The key is evenly matched antlers. Too bad they are so far and few between. I suppose that is why they call it a record book. To RECORD the one in a thousand, two thousand, or however many times a particular species produces a genuine specimen that should be recognized for what it is. An anomoly.
    Now lets talk record books. The benchmark for North American Big Game is and has been Boone and Crockett Club.(And to a similar degree, Pope and Young Club) To think of them as only a record keeping organization is to disregard all the men and women who have devoted countless hours and money through the years to protect and enhance habitat, wildlife resources and countless other projects that have been the bulk of their efforts for over a century.Ditto Pope and Young.
    Now as for the S.C.I., well any group that awards a hunter an "award" for shooting a baboon, is a lttle bit off base for my way of thinking. Maybe it's my narrow minded North American frame of mind.
    Whatever. As for recognizing that specimen that qualifies for entry in either B&C, or P&Y, I understand that it is entirely up to the individual who did the killing or owns the trophy.
    My way of thinking is the animal deserves to be recognized for reaching the pinnacle of it's potential as a representative of it's specie. It has beat all the odds to attain a size deemed record breaking by an outfit who strives to ensure that only those animals killed under a strict doctrine of fair chase gains entry into the printed pages, to be immortalized for years to come. Now do the hunters and owners need to be recognized also? As of today they are. I have two grizzly bears listed in Boone and Crockett. Ones in the top fifty, one just makes the minimum. They would be listed whether my name was or not. It's the least I can do to pay the animal all the respect it's earned by beating the odds to achieve the status as a true giant of it's kind. Thats my opinion. What's yours?

  12. #12
    Member martentrapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Fairbanks, Ak.
    Posts
    4,061

    Default

    Good post, Scott. More along the lines of what I was looking for. I thought some of the new and wannabe moose hunters would be interested in what to look for in a rack that might make the "book". Long wide palms, spread, and points all contribute to a better book score. One thing that usually does not contribute to a good score is long brow points. Long brow points are attractive. They make for an impressive looking antler. However, I believe that one of the B&C measurements is taken from the valley at the top of the palm, around the back side to the valley next to the inside brow point. Long points mean deep valleys, thus shortening this measurement. The antlers pictured by Strahan on the monster moose tactics thread have large brow and main palms with small points, and small valleys. It must have had a very long measurement from the top of the palm to the fore of the brow palm. Antlers with small, short(tho countable) points generally have more points than ones with long points.
    There seems to be a fair amount of animosity towards SCI on this forum. I believe they do their share of good PR, habitat stuff, etc. for he hunting community. Maybe I'm wrong.
    I can't help being a lazy, dumb, weekend warrior.......I have a JOB!
    I have less friends now!!

  13. #13
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    85

    Default B&C

    Excellent post grizzlykiller!

    There are many, MANY, large good-looking Moose that never make the minimum entry score. As mentioned, the B&C system (also copied by P&Y) gives the most scoring credit to mass & symetry for almost every antlered animal in North Amercia, Caribou being the only expcetion in that there are no deductions for symetry on Caribou. I've seen a lot of very pretty Moose that will never qualify for the B&C books. It would be fair to say that some antlers simply are "built for scoring", and some aren't.

    On this same note about Moose antlers, its interesting to study different antler formations from different parts of the state. The Kenia Penninsula for example is know for longggg brow points, they look cool. Most of the interior regions will produce heavly palmated brow's, and S.E. is know for massive main beams and weird curves to the main paddle. Looking through the B&C, P&Y, and SCI record books you'd be hard pressed to say any "one" area consistently produces large Moose than other area's. That said, there are certainly a few key area's that produce larger Moose than others. Compare this to Brown Bear and you'll only find two area's in the state that have EVER produced large skull sizes.
    Sooooooo....when we all go to the field this year for Moose season we'll have a little more re-assurance that a truly large Moose could come from many different area's around the state.

    The Boone & Crockett Club is a conservation organization. As the oldest CONSERVATION organization they recognized early on that some North American speices were being wiped-out by commercial hunters. The Buffalo is a good example. A fellow by the name of George Brid Grinell (spelling might be wrong) and other B&C members decided to start "recording" various speices while they were still on this planet. Over time this record keeping has been viewed by some as an an ego-trip for the people, this is NOT the case. The Boone & Crocket club wants to recogize the animal, not people. ANIMALS are "recorded" and animals are given credit for, amoung other things, size. Also, recording different animals antlers, skull, or horn is another way to historically record modern day conservation efforts.

    I don't have any big hang-up's with Safari Club International, however I think it would be safe to say they are very liberal. With all big clubs/organization's you're going to have a wide varitey of different people with different view points. I don't agree with a lot of what SCI stands for and represents, however they are the single LARGEST hunting/conservation organization in the World! SCI does a LOT for hunters, right here in North Amercia and around the World. I don't believe in blind allegance, however taking a pot-shot at one of our foremost hunting rights organizations isn't right either.

    good hunting...>Byron Lamb
    .

  14. #14

    Default

    Casper:
    That bull scores #54 in the B&C book and he isn't going to bother entering it?
    I wonder why?

  15. #15
    Member BRWNBR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    6,832

    Default not entering book animals

    sometimes it bothers me a bit and no offense to anyone here, when people get hairy about other hunters not entering their game into the books. One hunters priorities aren't neccessarly the priorites of everyone, i dont' drink beer when i hunt, some do. i use a gun, some don't. i won't wear scent lok clothing, some will. i'll enter my game in the books, some won't.
    Like Byron mentioned above, i dont' think the books is a complete and hard copy of all the trophies won, its a collection of some that folks have felt the desire to share with others.
    Rumor going around about a new world record brown bear taken down near frosty river this spring, the owner of the skull left it in anchorage to be cleaned and his booking agent called me to try and get me to run into anchorage and get it before something happened to it. The booking agent cared more about the numbers than the hunter and was willing to do whateve he had to to gain that status, i don't agree with that.
    nothing wrong with entering your own game, but it kinda bugs me when hunters care more about someone else game and the status they pin on it. almost as if they don't belive its true until they put it in the book, figuring they have something they are hidding if they won't enter it.
    bogus

  16. #16
    Member Casper50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sterling
    Posts
    588

    Default He's not that interested in the book.

    He did a self hunt, he's a pilot with his own plane. He's just not into the book. Its only been green scored. I don't think he even kept the cape. I also see no problems with his doing that. Just my opinion.

    www.mikesbritishguns.us

  17. #17

    Default Factors

    Many factors affect antler development. Interesting to note the terrain depicted in all photos of huge moose. One thing they all have in common is they are in GREAT HABITAT. Note the terrain of the pictured moose above and you will see that it was taken in the remnants of a previous fire. Best habitat you can get. Next would be clear cutted areas. F&G used to use large sheep footed vehicles to trample down old growth areas on the Kenai. Results were exceptional habitat. Of course those days are gone, and the habitat no longer supports much other than bears. Too dense.

  18. #18

    Default

    Are you sure thats not bettle killed spruce? Thats what it looks like to me but I could be wrong.

  19. #19
    Member bushrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Now residing in Fairbanks from the bush
    Posts
    4,288

    Default You asked

    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzlykiller
    My way of thinking is the animal deserves to be recognized for reaching the pinnacle of it's potential as a representative of it's specie. It has beat all the odds to attain a size deemed record breaking by an outfit who strives to ensure that only those animals killed under a strict doctrine of fair chase gains entry into the printed pages, to be immortalized for years to come. Now do the hunters and owners need to be recognized also? As of today they are. I have two grizzly bears listed in Boone and Crockett. Ones in the top fifty, one just makes the minimum. They would be listed whether my name was or not. It's the least I can do to pay the animal all the respect it's earned by beating the odds to achieve the status as a true giant of it's kind. Thats my opinion. What's yours?
    Scott,

    Well said. I think that it's gotten out of hand in recent years and that the animal and where it was taken (general location like GMU) should be in the book but we need now consider whether or not the hunter's name goes in the book. It's really turned into a circus on many fronts, primarily greed and ego driven, especially with the SCI scorebook and the repercussions of the high-fenced hunts and such. I've spoken with many guides who have said the clients now aren't the same clients of the past, that more and more of them want a "book" animal at any cost. I don't mean to distort the value of the books like B&C and P&Y, nor the great conservation efforts of those groups. They and the books have great value.

    Is there anything wrong with wanting to see your name in the book? Not inherently. But hunting is not, and should not be, about competition among hunters as to who can get their name in the "book." Of late, it has more and more taken this turn. And it's a shame. I blame SCI in large part for much of it. I'll not only take pot-shots at SCI, but I'll outright condemn them for their stance on everything from support of darted catch-and-release hunts to high-fenced hunts and allowing those animals to be entered into their own scorebook. They, more than any hunting org, have continually promoted things that betray all notions of fair chase and ethical standards in the hunting community, and it's filtering into the hunting community on the whole. When some kid on the Outdoor Channel shoots a deer over bait from a blind and then the camera zooms in on him and we hear him say, "Will it get in the book, Dad? Will it!?"

    Well, I can't swear here...but that's a friggin' bad thing to be teaching our youngsters. It sickens me to no end. That's not what hunting is about. Sadly, our youth are being taught that this is all a good thing on many fronts.

    Maybe it's time we seriously began contemplating leaving the hunter's name out of the book. Simply because of the bad apples. They always ruin it for us all. When money alone buys you a "place" in the book...well that wasn't the intention either. It was supposed to highlight the majesty of exceptional wildlife and the skill of the hunter. I don't like it when Mr. Big Bucks goes on a guided hunt and his guide does all the work an essentially puts this guy in place to make a shot. And then Big Bucks gets his name in the book. The guide goes along because it's great for business. Guides in many cases encourage entries. I feel for the guys and gals who hunt hard and ethically and have their name in the book alongside others who don't deserve it. The only answer I see, to keep it from spiraling farther out of control, and to stop the absurd competition so prevalent nowadays, is to cease putting the hunter's name in the book. But that isn't likely to happen.

    Best to all, and nothing personal; just an opinion.
    Mark



  20. #20
    Member dwhunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas/Alaska
    Posts
    468

    Default Record book

    "Guides in many cases encourage entries."

    I know guides that do just that, it is good for business when they can tout that they were the guide.

    Nothing in itself wrong with that, business is business and the guides need/want to make money.

    My main issue with the books are those that include high fence and raised animals. In those cases each animal has a different price tag in their ear and the guides just point to the animal in the hunters price range.

    Doug


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •