Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Marc Taylor
    replied
    On celebration of the animal

    In the instance of bears, I find it hard to believe it's about the animal, although I would like to think that it is. How is it that the book does not even list whether a bear was a boar or a sow? Certainly sows occasionally make the book, yet the sex of the bear is not listed, therefore it is not in my opinion, "about the beauty of the animal".


    As far as "Pageant Mentality" is concerned - Which was jabbed at in my second book under "A Sense of Belonging"; it is my opinion that, quoted - "We are smearing makeup on the faces of young children creating beauty many years beyond maturity, and we are smearing camouflage on the faces of young children creating killers many years below maturity."

    Taken out of context, it will sound like I'm against introducing children to hunting, which is far from true. I am against denying children a natural progression in learning by urging them to deal death long before they are old enough to understand life. When is it natural for a ten-year-old child to walk up and ask to hunt a Marco Polo sheep? And then we allow them to go on that hunt before the age of twelve?! Then celebrate it?! Disgusting. It's being done.

    A child, in my opinion, needs to participate in a hunt which he/she planned and executed (squirrels and rabbits maybe) long before we include them in the hunts where they are capable ONLY of pulling the trigger.

    If I'm way off base here, I apologize. I progressed from shooting Blue Jays (no nutritional value, by-the-way) with a BB gun. My first gun was not a .300 S.A.U.M. as it is for some these days.

    Sorry, it just struck a nerve...

    Taylor

    Leave a comment:


  • Grizzlykiller
    replied
    antlers and those who measure them

    I hope I am not guilty of hijacking this thread into a discussion on the merits of Records Books.
    Martentrapper was interested in what some of us look for in stud bulls and now we are giving our opinions on the records books themselves.
    I guess thats what happens when guys such as myself have a keyboard in front of me and no one to tell me to shut the hell up and stay on topic.
    I welcome the direction we have taken though and have my own opinions, however this topic will forever go back and forth. Similar to the subsistence issue, you are on one side of a fence or the other.
    I do respect the person who chooses not to enter their bones and skulls. If you choose to leave them for the porcupines and squirrels, so be it.

    As far as the idea of S.C.I. being in the crosshairs of a few folks, well no animosity or disrepect is intended. It is true they have reached many many sportsmen and women and they are responsible for an abundance of great conservation efforts and continue to benefit the cause of hunters world wide.
    What causes me to distance myself from them is the pre-occupation with "trophy" recognition, as Bushrat describes.
    I realize different strokes for different folks applies to the hunting world also. It just seems that there is an emphasis on ribbons and medals and awards with them that turns me off.
    They seem to celebrate the hunter more than the animal and that is about the best I can describe why I hold Boone and Crockett and Pope and Young in much higher regard.
    As far as those two groups one day deleting all recognition of hunters and owners, well you can rest easy knowing the folks who run them are aware of the unease it may cause some of us by having all those names attached to the more than 22,000 animals currently listed.
    However I bet it won't happen any time soon. They seem to recognize that that it is a shared celebration between animal/hunter. Not only has the animal reached the pinnacle of it's potential, the hunter may have reached his/ her greatest achievement as a hunter, in the regards of killing an animal worthy of entry into those pages.
    Don't misunderstand what I'm saying though. I too am very aware that even though fair chase is the code, **** happens. Undoubtedly there are entries listed that would not hold up to further scrutiny by Sgt. Stadenko.
    As for the Big Bucks hunter who employs a fleet of top guides to locate the 210 point typical mule deer, 200 point bighorn, 400 point bull elk, 250 point bull moose , or the ten foot brown bear, nine foot grizzly so he can fill his auction tag/ governor tag, well the money is his and if he/she gets wood from bragging it up to the cronies, whatever. Buying an animal and hunting it are two entirely separate issues. Generally those auction tags benefit the resources so thats one good thing but ego plays too large a role with just about every human activity,hunting will never escape those with large egos and larger bank accounts.
    Unfortunately at the present time there is no records book separating those who bust their ass and earn the animal, from those who buy their way in.
    Finally, as far as no skill being involved in the killing of a records book animal, I disagree. Being in the right place at the right time certainly plays a major role, but it's not a coincidence that some people kill large specimens year after year, with the occasional genuine stud thrown in. Lucky? yeah. Skill? bet your ass.

    Leave a comment:


  • Akres
    replied
    Good

    Originally posted by BrnBear
    I'm familiar with the area the above moose was shot in. Its beetle killed spruce. No fire there for the last 50 years.
    Casper:
    I seen the same pic on the B&C web site. That's why I wondered why he didn't enter it. If he didn't post the pic to B&C, I wonder who did?
    The B&C record book is a record of the animal, not the hunter. If you get an animal in the book, your just lucky, or have lots of money, not an exceptional hunter. Skill has very little to do with killing a record book animal.
    Perhaps there is a silver lining as a result of the beetle plague. Fires, dying spruce, clear cutting, etc all will let new growth appear. An obvious jump to conclusions on my part, was not aware the beetle infestation reached over there. I did know of a couple fairly recent fires in the area.

    Leave a comment:


  • BrnBear
    replied
    I'm familiar with the area the above moose was shot in. Its beetle killed spruce. No fire there for the last 50 years.
    Casper:
    I seen the same pic on the B&C web site. That's why I wondered why he didn't enter it. If he didn't post the pic to B&C, I wonder who did?
    The B&C record book is a record of the animal, not the hunter. If you get an animal in the book, your just lucky, or have lots of money, not an exceptional hunter. Skill has very little to do with killing a record book animal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cheeser
    replied
    scoring...

    I stopped paying attention to B&C scores (as well as the rest) a long time ago. Once I realized farms (usually called ranches) were raising pets so clients can shoot them (yeah, like a petting zoo) and entering them into the books, the validity of the scores went out the window.

    I consider those animals halfway domesticated and they don't belong with "fair chase" trophies. And spare me the "the ranch is 5000 acres..." crap. A farm is a farm. If you pen them in (regardless of the size of the pen) and/or provide feed or food plots for them, it's farming and you're hunting in the equivalent of a petting zoo.

    Personally, I'll take a doe over a buck or a cow over bull every time and anytime. When I do shoot a male I find the youngest one possible, and I leave the antlers/horns in the woods next to the gut pile (other critters devour them for the minerals). The only trophies I need from a hunt are pictures and a full freezer. :-)

    Leave a comment:


  • dwhunter
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • bushrat
    replied
    You asked

    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


    Leave a comment:


  • AkHunter45
    replied
    Are you sure thats not bettle killed spruce? Thats what it looks like to me but I could be wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • Akres
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Casper50
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • BRWNBR
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


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

    Leave a comment:


  • Byron_Lamb
    replied
    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
    .

    Leave a comment:


  • martentrapper
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Grizzlykiller
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:

Footer Adsense

Collapse
Working...
X