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

[martentrapper]

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.

[Casper50]

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

[martentrapper]

Cool photo. What was the green and official score?

[PatrickH]

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

[BrnBear]

moose

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

[Casper50]

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

[martentrapper]

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.

[Water_Gremlin]

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.

[dwhunter]

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

[TWA]

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

[Grizzlykiller]

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?

[martentrapper]

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.

[Byron_Lamb]

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
.

[BrnBear]

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

[BRWNBR]

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