why zebra is not in the record book?

27 November 2013, 01:31

P-A Åhlén

quote:
Originally posted by SDR:
You need the length of the stripe and the width of the stripe. Add them all together and divide by the number of stripes. Shadow stripes count as a 1/4 inch deduction.

27 November 2013, 02:01

BNagel

Maybe for the same reason I couldn't find anything based on impala for wife's jewelry request -- they're just food/bait over there?

27 November 2013, 02:24

MARK H. YOUNG

Mario,

Good point. If bears, cats and hyenas can be measured for the record books by skull size why not a zebra? Just because they never have had a record book category does that mean that they never will? Send an e-mail to SCI and see what they say about it.

Mark

MARK H. YOUNG
MARK'S EXCLUSIVE ADVENTURES
7094 Oakleigh Dr. Las Vegas, NV 89110
Office 702-848-1693
Cell, Whats App, Signal 307-250-1156 PREFERRED
E-mail markttc@msn.com
Website: myexclusiveadventures.com
Skype: markhyhunter
Check us out on https://www.facebook.com/pages...ures/627027353990716

27 November 2013, 03:04

Jorge400

You measure them by their tooth length. Haven't any of you heard the idiom "long in the tooth"?

27 November 2013, 03:07

Jefffive

Since trophies are generally males you could use the length of their... nevermind.

Would be interesting to see the PH trying to evaluate them.

27 November 2013, 04:53

MacD37

It would be easy to form a measurement based on the squared hide like brown bear and polar bear are measured combined with skull length!

I really like hunting Zebra!

......................................................................

27 November 2013, 05:57

billrquimby

quote:
It would be easy to form a measurement based on the squared hide like brown bear and polar bear are measured combined with skull length!

Hunters may have measured their tigers and lions "between the pegs" and bears by the "squared hide" early on, but to my knowledge neither method was ever used by recognized records keepers such as Rowland Ward, Boone & Crockett or SCI. Hides can be stretched and pegs aren't always positioned properly.

Zebras can be tough to hunt and kill, especially when hunted regularly, and they make nifty rugs, shoulder mounts, chair coverings and hat bands. In my humble opinion, though, I don't think they warrant keeping records on them.

I feel the same way about wild turkeys, African wildcats, bobcats, genets, grysbok, and a whole bunch of critters large and small that are being measured and recorded now.

Bill Quimby

27 November 2013, 06:09

juanpozzi

Mario excellent point ,capibaras for example are in the record book and we measured the skulls ,on my humble opinion zebras must be in SCI record book .

27 November 2013, 08:06

jdollar

let me think. why aren't zebras in the record book? -BECAUSE THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME

27 November 2013, 08:18

Jaco Human

quote:
Originally posted by jdollar:
let me think. why aren't zebras in the record book? -BECAUSE THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME

They look the same at a distance, but when you compare the skins there is not one that looks the same, the paterns differs very much, take a look at the paterns on their backs before the tail. The patern differs from animal to animal, the same as the dfferent face masks on a Gemsbuck.

Life is how you spend the time between hunting trips.

Through Responsible Sustainable hunting we serve Conservation.
Outfitter permit no. Limpopo ZA/LP/73984
PH permit no. Limpopo ZA/LP/81197
Jaco Human
SA Hunting Experience

jacohu@mweb.co.za
www.sahuntexp.com

27 November 2013, 09:33

Jan Dumon

I say we submit porcupine to be accepted to the record books. They all look different and the quills are of different lengths , hell we can even count them.....

27 November 2013, 09:43

surestrike

It would take balls to measure a zebra.

27 November 2013, 09:45

jdollar

quote:
Originally posted by Jaco Human:
quote:
Originally posted by jdollar:
let me think. why aren't zebras in the record book? -BECAUSE THEY ALL LOOK THE SAME

They look the same at a distance, but when you compare the skins there is not one that looks the same, the paterns differs very much, take a look at the paterns on their backs before the tail. The pattern differs from animal to animal, the same as the dfferent face masks on a Gemsbuck.

i have to say the 2 i have shot looked pretty much the same at 100 yards. i never really had the chance to check the stripes on their backs.. much less check the individual patterns before their tails. you are right, though- in looking at the rugs, they do look different. i wonder if they will make the non-existent record book???

27 November 2013, 10:15

Jefffive

Well, think about it logically. The distinguishing characteristics of a bull elephant are his tusks, so his trophy quality has always been judged by the weight of the tusks.

The key characteristic of a kudu or sable, the horns, are measured for length.

The distinguishing characteristic of a zebra is the stripes, so just count them. Most stripes wins.

27 November 2013, 17:31

Matt Graham

I asked SCI recently about having some of our predators included (some are even historically included in our local record books) - dingo, fox etc.. and they said thanks but no thanks.

How capybara got in there is a complete mystery

I guess at one point in time a committee was admitting these species but now they have said 'enough!'.

27 November 2013, 18:16

Saeed

quote:
Originally posted by Jefffive:
Well, think about it logically. The distinguishing characteristics of a bull elephant are his tusks, so his trophy quality has always been judged by the weight of the tusks.

The key characteristic of a kudu or sable, the horns, are measured for length.

The distinguishing characteristic of a zebra is the stripes, so just count them. Most stripes wins.

Funny enough, the SCI Records Committee wanted to put zebra in the record book.

Apparently, the disagreement was who gets into the Inner Circle in Striped Animals. Do they take the black or white stripes into consideration.

They could not agree on it, as some zebra have more black stripes, and some have more white stripes

27 November 2013, 19:06

jimmara

No animal should be in a record book.
The hunting industry would be a whole lot better off with no record books

27 November 2013, 20:24

JCS271

I guess I am lucky. I never found it necessary to score or measure an animal I have shot. That is probably because I have never measured the quality of an adventure with the size of the animals taken.

27 November 2013, 21:07

Skyline

There are already way too many categories in the SCI Record Book as it is. I agree with Bill Quimby.

It appears they have to keep splitting hairs to create new sub-species classes and expanding into species that no one has ever kept records of in order to create new categories for those who want to play the awards game.

What is next, a grand slam of rodents? We could add to the capybara by including beaver…. wait, North American beaver, European beaver, Patagonia beaver, then add nutria and agouti.

If we are going to take zebra, then a whole new slam can be created with 5 or 6 categories for the various races.

The whole thing has gone beyond ridiculous.

27 November 2013, 21:14

Greg Brownlee

Maybe I'm incorrect in my assumption, but I don't believe Zebra's skulls continue to grow throughout their lives like a bear or cat does. I know some people don't agree with record books, but when measuring skull size of bears and cats, typically the largest skulls are of the oldest animals (as noted by the world record bears being mostly pick up skulls).

Horse skulls typically stop growing around 3-5 years old, so I'd assume that zebras are somewhat similar. Therefore, a skull wouldn't be a good way to measure the trophy quality of a zebra based on age, so there's not really a record book value to zebras.

Skin size isn't a good way to do it either, because some of the older zebra are probably a lot smaller than they were in their prime. I'm probably digging in deeper than necessary on this question, but that's my $0.02 for what it's worth.

Greg Brownlee
Neal and Brownlee, LLC
Quality Worldwide Big Game Hunts Since 1975
918/299-3580
greg@NealAndBrownlee.com

www.NealAndBrownlee.com

Instagram: @NealAndBrownleeLLC

Hunt reports:

Botswana 2010

Alaska 2011

Bezoar Ibex, Turkey 2012

Mid Asian Ibex, Kyrgyzstan 2014

27 November 2013, 22:16

DCS Member

I think just about any mature zebra taken in a trophy. They are beautiful animals. I still need to get my rug back from my ex girlfriend, damn it!

27 November 2013, 22:49

Pegleg

You could measure their wolf teeth.

28 November 2013, 00:23

MacD37

quote:
Originally posted by JCS271:
I guess I am lucky. I never found it necessary to score or measure an animal I have shot. That is probably because I have never measured the quality of an adventure with the size of the animals taken.

I agree! I've never measured an animal I've taken, but do know the measurements of some because the PH measured them and told me how they measured, most of which I promptly forgot.

As far as there being no value in record books, The R&W book was originally started so one would know where the best of any species are found. That was so hunts would be in those areas and no wasted time in areas where the animals were mediocre or shot out.

The problem started when folks started a competitions as WHO's name was in that book as having shot the BEST! The key would have been to record the animal and location, and leave the name of the hunter out of the book.

The Bass tournaments have become much the same as the hunting record books, turning fishing into a competition

..................................................................

28 November 2013, 00:26

buffalo

quote:
Originally posted by JCS271:
I guess I am lucky. I never found it necessary to score or measure an animal I have shot. That is probably because I have never measured the quality of an adventure with the size of the animals taken.

+1…. I agree… My ph`s has sometimes measured some - but for their own records… I can't even remember a single one, just doesn't interest me…

28 November 2013, 00:55

billrquimby

quote:
As far as there being no value in record books, The R&W book was originally started so one would know where the best of any species are found. That was so hunts would be in those areas and no wasted time in areas where the animals were mediocre or shot out.

Actually, the R&W book began as a sales promotion effort by a very shrewd taxidermist/businessman.

Bill Quimby

28 November 2013, 01:50

Mario

I did not want to discuss if the record book is a good thing or not. Only I think that thay can find space for the zebra when they enter animals such capybara (good Juan...) or the wild turkey

28 November 2013, 01:55

Gayne C. Young

I would say add them to the book

28 November 2013, 06:22

MacD37

A funny story about my first zebra! The PH said “we are going to look for a nice zebra today, have you ever shot a zebra?” At my answer of NO! The PH said “well there is a tradition involved with shooting a zebra! You have to hit a black stripe!” When I said I can do that! To which he replied, “Well that is not the hard part the bullet has to exit on a black stripe as well!

I shot a very nice zebra stallion, and when we reached the zebra he was hit on a black stripe! I said well see where the bullet hit him? Then we turned the zebra over the bullet had exited on a black stripe as well. Of course I promptly took credit for the amazing shooting! My PH and the camp staff got a real kick out of that, and congratulated the PH on his fine shooting instruction to his client!

………………………………………………………..

28 November 2013, 06:40

Matt Graham

quote:
Originally posted by MacD37:
I agree! I've never measured an animal I've taken, but do know the measurements of some because the PH measured them and told me how they measured, most of which I promptly forgot.

As far as there being no value in record books, The R&W book was originally started so one would know where the best of any species are found. That was so hunts would be in those areas and no wasted time in areas where the animals were mediocre or shot out.

The problem started when folks started a competitions as WHO's name was in that book as having shot the BEST! The key would have been to record the animal and location, and leave the name of the hunter out of the book.

The Bass tournaments have become much the same as the hunting record books, turning fishing into a competition

..................................................................

Lots or people love a competition.... just the way it is... I dont agree with competition in hunting - but it is there.

28 November 2013, 07:03

fujotupu

quote:
The R&W book was originally started so one would know where the best of any species are found.

The problem started when folks started a competitions as WHO's name was in that book as having shot the BEST!

Now what isn't truer than that?

There are others however who will think otherwise!

28 November 2013, 07:06

MikeBurke

quote:
Originally posted by Mario:
for my experience zebra is not only beautiful but also a fine game animal. I do not know why is not in the recond book. Only because he havent horns?

For me the better question is why is there a record book?

28 November 2013, 07:17

BaxterB

quote:
For me the better question is why is there a record book?

28 November 2013, 07:44

Jefffive

quote:
Originally posted by Mike70560:
quote:
Originally posted by Mario:
for my experience zebra is not only beautiful but also a fine game animal. I do not know why is not in the recond book. Only because he havent horns?

For me the better question is why is there a record book?

Human nature. I'll guarantee 15,000 years ago there were arguments over whether long, thin mammoth tusks were better than shorter, thicker ones, and you can bet your ass there was a way to measure the canines on sabre-tooth cats long before there were inches.

Record books should honor exceptional animals, not whoever bagged them.

28 November 2013, 13:25

fujotupu

quote:
Originally posted by Pegleg:
You could measure their wolf teeth.

If I am not mistaken they wear with age so the PH would have to oblige by trying to identify the younger of the stallions, those "longer in the tooth" for the trophy to make it into the "Top Ten" - though also a counter productive practice if we want to maintain good genetics in the herd...... similar to shooting a wide soft-bossed buffalo.

If we are to focus on the two teeth (canines) in qualifying the trophy for the book maybe this could be achieved through x-rays and prove that the animal was too old to mingle with the mares ...... like old Simba