??? Posting Scores ???

[THOR]

I am with you Devin...I have killed a few deer that go 100+ and many that that have gone 100-. I think if someone is going to post a score, make it accurate. a lot of people dont really know how to score as well. a lot of the animals I have taken could make the record book, but i never submitted them. i had them scored. Also...to each there own...I see so many animals that are scored so much higher than they really are. the important thing to me is the hunt and what you remember and what is past on to others!

~Mark

PS youre a great hunter, guide and taxidermist....keep it up!

[ThomC]

My brother brags to my family that he kills a 8 pointer and I say mine was a 3 pointer. They think that he is a better hunter. He lives in Minnesota. If I correct them then they po po me. fishermen and hunters stretch the truth because the first liar doesnt have a chance.

[stanley]

I don't measure anything....... Maybe because I have never killed anything worth measuring , but mainly because it just doesn't matter to me. I love to get out and hunt in the hills with family and friends. Just makes me feel good to be out. Feels like home..... All animals killed are trophies to the shooter! My sweet little daughter killed her first deer on the Kiabab last year. Wanna know what it scored? It was a DOE, and it scored a perfect 10 in my book! That experience with her was priceless to me!

 

I don't care if someone puts a + sign after a score, because I frankly don't care about anyone's score anyway..... I don't begrudge anyone who is interested in the score of a deer's rack, it's just that I'm personally not interested. To each their own.

 

S.

 

[Becker]

Uh oh, I was not looking to stir up so much controversy....To each his own (always)...I agree with what everyone is saying.

 

I for one believe that lots of people have lost what the ideas behind record books are or could be. To me, record books are a HISTORY of what beautiful animals have been harvested. More so in my opinion record books are a way to respect and honor the characteristics of that said animal. Just because an animal has more or less antler/horn in no way ever diminishes its value in my mind. Any animal is a true trophy, no matter size.

 

I hear lots of people say oh no I am not going to enter my animal because I am not into that boasting stuff. Its really a shame in my mind that this happens because no one will ever be able to recognize what that said animal is or was. I find myself often looking in the record books, checking out the "scores", pictures, and just admiring those animals for what they are. I am sure that EVERY hunter does. Thats what record books are really about and I wish people could get back into that spirit.

 

I guess over all my topic has changed a little, hopefully my idea came across here for what I was trying to present in the beginning. That is pay respect to the animals in which we harvest, they "score" what they score. Obviously its not all about score, hunting is much more, lets not cloud the waters and let these awesome animals stand alone as they are!!!

[billrquimby]

Becker:

 

I edited the SCI record books for nearly 17 years, and agree with you that record books do record the history of hunting.

 

However, there is a problem with your theory about them honoring the animal. if a record book's goal truly is to honor abnormal animals (and that is what record-book animals are), why publish the names of the hunters who killed them?

 

The answer is there would be no books without those names.

 

Bill Quimby

[Guest super jumbo]

Why are people that are into scoring blamed for some how ruining hunting? I am into scoring and i dont see how i have done anything to ruin hunting. If anything i think scoring has brought more people into the sport in general than it has pushed people away. Name any kind of "sport" that doesnt involve some form of competition, or a baseline to measure some form of accomplishment in that sport itself. Scoring is just that form of baseline for the sport of hunting, and nothing more than that. Now killing a high scoring deer doesnt define the quality of the hunt so to speak, but it can be used to measure some form of success in the scorers mind. If you dont care about score then its just that simple you dont care and move on. Dont sit hear though and blame the guys that score for having something to aspire in the the field, and dont just pull up on opening morning and pound the 1st 2 point that dares show his head. Bill Quimby, you look like you go to africa to go hunting? When you went to africa how did you describe to your guide over there what animal you would be willing to shoot or not shoot? Did you go by body weight, color,height, or maybe a score? You see the point. I am going to go out on a limb here by saying this, but most of the guys that talk about scoring being bad for hunting are just a tad bit jealous that the bucks that they are shooting arent as big as the "scores" buck, otherwise it wouldnt matter. The reason why i say this is because if you truly didnt care about scoring, you wouldnt care if someone chose to score. I will add that on the few hunts that i was invovled with this year where score wasnt an issue at all that it did make the hunt alot easier and quicker. Bill not trying to single you out, but trying to show a broader perspective on the whole scoring thing being so negative.

[WadeNAZ]

I have shot one coues and it was a whopping 100- One hundred minus a lot.

 

Dont really care about the +. or the scores. I think if someone who likes to look at scores or measure their bucks then good for them. I think more folks should be know what a 100 buck looks like and pass on everything under that so there are more for me.

[AZbowhntr]

I have shot a couple bulls and several bucks. I have only put a tape to one buck and he wasn't a trophy as far as score goes. But I was curious so I taped him. I am not an official scorer so I scored him very conservatively and came up with a 140"+ mule deer. If I was to have him officially scored he might actually score 142" but he at least scores 140"+. That is the way I look at it. If you score your bull or buck yourself than you can't accurately say it is something and an 1/8" or whatever.

[billrquimby]

"Bill Quimby, you look like you go to africa to go hunting? When you went to africa how did you describe to your guide over there what animal you would be willing to shoot or not shoot? Did you go by body weight, color,height, or maybe a score?"

 

At age 75 with a fixed income amid rising inflation, I've probably made my last hunt outside the USA, but I did take more than 60 types of big game animals with rifle, bow, handgun and muzzleloader on six continents and more than a dozen countries over the past 63 years. I long ago outgrew the need to prove my manhood or my skill as a hunter by taking only "trophies."

 

When hunting in Africa and everywhere else, I always let the professional hunters know I didn't need the largest and best animals in their areas. I was interested only in hunting a mature animal that was representative of the species, and would not be crushed if I went home empty-handed. I hunted for the experience of hunting, and memories and friendships gained through hunting still are more important to me than measurements of antlers, horns and skulls.

 

I was fortunate to have taken a few record-book animals during those 63 years, including what would have been the world-record Siberian roebuck at the time if I had registered it. The lion in my avatar probably would make SCI's top ten, but it also was not registered.

 

The problem with "scoring" is that it brings out the worst in some people, and those who do not hunt judge all of us by their actions. This post already is too long to give examples, but I could list dozens of despicable things that grown men (and women) have done to get their names in a record book. The worst example that quickly comes to mind was a wealthy Spaniard who bought a zoo so he could import live animals from around the world, shoot them and enter their measurements!

 

Bill Quimby

[Guest super jumbo]

There will always be examples of a few hunters who do some very strange things for the sake of score, but i think those examples are relatively rare. I do agree with you bill, that some hunters have gone way to far to achieve a certain score. There are also lots of hunters who do lots of not so good stuff in the field just to harvest a yearling buck, and correspondingly there are several horror stories associated with those endeavors. I think i have "scored" every time i am in the field whether i harvest an animal or not, and if i am lucky enough to bag a high scoring animal, then i am extra stoked. I know i have come close to high jacking this post, but scoring isnt such a bad thing. When it comes to the "plus" being added to someones posted score, i think most people (including myself) arent proficient enough to score down to the eighth of an inch. Unless it has been officially scored down the eighth i usually put a plus.

[Becker]

Bill:

 

I totally agree with you!!! There would not be a book without the names...

 

I just have a different view about what I get from the record books. I am someone who is a score chaser AKA "Trophy Hunter". I am looking for that buck that tips the top of the record books. High scoring deer trip my trigger, Thats me....Always been that way. However I am overly excited about anyone who gets out in the field, score chasers, meat hunters, or weekend warriors, whatever you want to call yourself. All have their place and all should have the same respect for the other. As I mentioned before...TO EACH HIS OWN!!! Get out there and hunt.

 

 

I mostly wanted to see what everyone's perception of what the + means, more out of curiosity than anything.....It seems more than not, and not bagging on anyone, but most of the people posting the + are those who are really into scores...If they are that into it, post it up hahaha My future posts will all be -

 

And HAPPY HOLIDAYS EVERYONE HAVE A GREAT CHRISTMAS

[billrquimby]

I was a trophy hunter at one time, too, as my dozen or so entries in the SCI books will show. The more I hunted, though, the more I realized that it really made no difference to anyone, including me, whether I shot something that qualified for a book. Editing a record book also revealed just how low some people will sink to get their names in a book. Everyone hunts for different reasons, and I have no problem with that. I do have problems with those who criticize others who shoot anything less than a trophy.

 

Bill Quimby

[Shooter McGavin]

I had to ask my son who is kindergarten to borrow his 6" ruler to measure my monster. Unicorns are trophies in there own special class. My trophies consist of the memories that are made out in the field with my buddies and mother nature. Yeah it would be nice to have a truly record book mount, maybe one day. Plus this minus that who cares.....

[longshot 260 rem]

WOW being one of the newest members of the Plus club let me share a few points

 

 

I don’t think I could win. If I had posted BIG BUCK DOWN someone would have came back demanding a score. If I had posted 130 4/8 BUCK someone would have held my feet to the fire for not having the right pictures to back up the score. So I decided to post 125” + change. I knew that the buck was bigger than that. I figured I would give myself a little room for all those little 1/8ths and not embarrass myself along the way.

 

I am not a professional hunter, photographer or even a B&C scorer. I am just a regular old Joe just out to enjoy the great outdoors.

 

On Saturday December 10^th 2011 I had an experience of a lifetime. I come to this site to share a story and photo. I had no idea that one small symbol would wrinkle someone’s panties.

 

My intent was not to try to make a buck bigger than it is or to try to make someone think I am something I am not. Just tell a neat story that came together for my brother and I. The buck is still the same size the story is still the same one. But no harm was done.

 

I guess we could require a score from a professional hunter, taxidermist or a B&C scorer before anyone could post a story or a picture. That way you would have the right scores and all of the little facts would be right. It would be a bit boring reading around here but the facts would be right for the few posts that someone may post and no plus would be needed.

 

 

 

Thank you for all of your positive comments and PM”s

 

 

Have a Merry Christmas and Happy New Years.

 

 

Lane

 

 

[elpepe25]

In agreement w/ Becker,

 

If you’re going to attach a number to a critter, please attach the whole number. If you take the time to write how awesome an individual critter is (gross score + or -) why not cap it off?

 

But each author-poster has the prerogative to post as they wish.

 

I half learned to judge bucks due to this site. We get the opportunity to look at the pictures and see a number next to them.

 

I don’t feel that attaching a value system to a critter degrades anything. One battle in conservation is the lack of a value system. Until something gives the item in question a value, it will be worthless or exploited. When hunters assign a value to a critter based on experience, size, age class or gross score; the creature is still being valued.

 

When wanting to harvest a “mature representation” of a species… something is still being measured, like it or not.