Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Destroying trophy value?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    702

    Default Destroying trophy value?

    The part where you have destroyed trophy value by splitting the skull on a caribou from a Tier II hunt has me confused.
    I have to assume it ONLY means that you will not be able to get a split skull and antlers entered into the record books if it qualified, right?
    So for 99% of the people that get boo in the T II hunt no trophy value is destroyed by splitting the skull. It just makes it a little harder to mount on your wall. Having done a few it surely isn't that big a deal, nor is cutting them off and mounting them on an artificial pedicle.
    So, this rule doesn't mean squat to the vast majority of hunters who want to display their rack, from this years hunt, on the wall. A little extra time or money to get it ready for display is all it means, right. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

  2. #2
    Member mod elan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Glennallen
    Posts
    1,476

    Default

    You are absolutely correct. All other arguments aside, if you just want to hang it on the wall it can be put back together and walla good as new. We've also found ways to get moose antlers pieced back together from other hunts where F&G takes the top half of one palm.

  3. #3
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    The bottom line is that it is yet another form of access discouragement.

    Some people won't bother with hunts that have this requirement. Thus, they have successfully lowered the number of invaders in their (or a vocal opponent's) wilderness.

    There are an incredible array of tools used by federal and state governments to deny or discourage access.

    And despite the fact that they've already gone overboard with it, I suspect we'll see many more methods that are even more creative.

  4. #4
    Member Matt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Antlers shouldn't matter anyways in a subsistence hunt. Techinally, they should just be left in the field.

  5. #5
    Mark
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt View Post
    Antlers shouldn't matter anyways in a subsistence hunt. Techinally, they should just be left in the field.
    I'd like that option, especially if proof of sex is attached to the meat anyway.

    Why both?

  6. #6
    Member Mkay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    anchorage
    Posts
    748

    Default The Scam Continues

    The poor folks who hunt the Nelchina herd are hunting for food. Why would they need a trophy rack to be mounted by a taxidermist. That costs money. Something makes no sense. According to the latest, folks from Kasilof will be traveling several hundred miles, bypassing several Fred Meyers and Carrs to shoot one caribou around Paxson. Figure the gas/diesel bill.

    I can imagine this conversation. " Gertrude, if we don't get a caribou we will have to sell the vacation home in Maui".

    Out Here.

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
  •