There is nothing wrong with record books as such.

I enjoy looking through the RW book, and find it very interesting.

What SCI did was made that into an all new ball game.

It became the holy grail of hunting.

As if that was not enough, they started their INNER CIRCLES, where the some who have absolutely no idea what hunting is, jumped on the bandwagon and got into the this utterly silly competition.

I did a bit of a study on some of the top names in SCI record book.

They have spend so little time in the bush, but seem to have an extraordinary number of animals very high in SCI book.

Further study showed that practically all their so called "wild" trophies were gotten by uncouth individuals masquerading as professional hunters who buy these from farms before an auction - because they know they already have a buyer, willing to jump into a plane and fly over to kill it.

Animals were being transported by charter flights, by oil tankers converted to carry animals, all to satisfy these so called "hunters".

Just so they can have their name in some silly, worthless book.

It never occurred to them that all their efforts to create this is the reason why this book has become irrelevant.

I have been hunting for many years, and have spoken to other hunters with a combined years of experience that might span several hundred years.

They all know big representatives of animals do not grow on trees, and getting one is more luck than anything else.

Reminds me of that old beer advert.

Where the owner of the beer company was standing next to what looks like pristine lake.

He was talking about going all around the world trying to find the purist water to use in his beer.

Right behind him, was a man pissing in the lake!

A perfect example of what SCI has achieved!

Pissing in the lake

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by billrquimby:

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
The travesty of the SCI record book is that it created it's own taxonomy system to satisfy the competition theme. High fives all around and medals for all so that those who shoot non trophy animals of a species ( size based on regional occurrence ) can also be included.

The intent of RW was not competition though a degree of competition evolved from it especially from visitor trophy hunters mainly from the US. The intent was purely a record of a biometric trait.

Alf:

All these years after the fact, it's impossible to know what motivated Roland Ward to publish his record books. My guess is he used them as marketing tools for his taxidermy business.

Bill Quimby

Bill,

RW never went to the extreme lengths SCI do to make hunting into a competition.

They single handedly created an obnoxious group of so called professional hunters whose sole purpose in life is to buy record animals, transport them to another location, and get the classless idiot to fly over and kill it to add to his name.

I admit to knowing nothing of the early history of Rowland Ward's record books, but I would suspect that he recorded only the measurements of animals taken by his customers.

It is doubtful that the egos of hunters of yesteryear were much different from those of today, so it probably wasn't long before his customers were competing among themselves for having the most and largest trophies in Ward's book.

Incidentally, I have reason to know SCI's books surpassed RW's as an important source of information for scientists at least 20 years ago, probably because they contain more entries and more secondary information.

Bill Quimby

Actually many of the early trophy hunters did so on the premise of collecting specimens for Museums. Most were members of some or other Royal Society and many private collections were actually opened to the public.

As I have stated a review of the history of RW would be in order.


If it were not for private individuals such as the late Steve Smith and the Halse family of South Africa RW would have ceased to be.

The Halse family also operated a store in Johannesburg under the RW banner that sold amongst other RW limited and numbered editions and sets of art works. RW commissioned some famous South African Wildlife artists for their art publications.

They also sold old hunting books.

When RW turned 100 years RW published a limited run of numbered leather bound subscribers editions of their record book. My wife entered two of my trophies for this edition.

RW was very much part of the old Kenya hunting scene and somehow its in many ways a connection to the past.

There are many many nostalgic things about African hunting, RW would be high on the list, so is Land Rover, Rigby, Jeffery and H&H and the name Kynoch.

Over time others have come that arguably is better like Toyota and some "american stuff" but truth be told it is the old names that stirs the hunters heart.

I like the record books for what I see them best used for. That being the natural history of a particular species, geography, genetics, etc. but just like anything else in life what one person sees as an aid another takes as competition.

Most of these record books started out in time when the world and what's in it was less generally known to the masses. The books documented what was available, where it was located, its natural history as well as who took what animal by size. They were written by people who were joiners of organizations that represented their interests.

My fathers generation belonged to clubs that gave awards for higher levels commitment. It could be the Mason's Elks or whomever. The point is they valued the achievement of reaching higher levels. I'm sure a few of them gloated over their accomplishments amongst their friends and I'm sure the rest didn't like it even then.

A club like SCI is no different but the current generation looking at them is. People now are far less the joiners of groups and in fact tend to look at them with either disinterest or even suspicion.

Maybe SCI does need to change to match modern times by minimizing the focus on awards. Maybe they need to be more reactive to the challenges that face hunting today. But the only way to make that happen is to participate in those changes. Everybody can complain but very few today are willing to participate to change what they don't agree with.

Record books are no more than a recording of our interests as hunters, there's nothing wrong with that. Yes a few people will always take things bit too far but the best way to deal with that is to ignore them and focus on the positive things that clubs like SCI do.

As a PH, it's a difficult thing hunting with a client who's solely focused on numbers and records. Thankfully it doesn't happen nearly as much as most would imagine. Most (and I literally mean 99 percent) of hunters want to hunt an old animal that's a good representation of the species. That's the way it should be and for the most part is.

However, when you do take an animal that's an obvious exception...I want to measure it. Not to boast but to compare. It's good to know that there still are animals out there on the areas that you hunt that measure up to those on the records.[/QUOTE]

But then the inverse: Ph claims they "hate" tape and number hunters....... but then why do they charge incrementally more by size ?

And this does not just apply to Africa.
I hunted Montana as a vistor hunter and the guides and outfitters charged Bison by Size
(age)

quote:

I hunted Montana as a vistor hunter and the guides and outfitters charged Bison by Size
(age)

Because the beef cow standing next to it in the same pasture is measured by the same criteria.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
But then the inverse: Ph claims they "hate" tape and number hunters....... but then why do they charge incrementally more by size ?

And this does not just apply to Africa.
I hunted Montana as a vistor hunter and the guides and outfitters charged Bison by Size
(age)

Who does that and why would you hunt with them? I certainly don't do that and don't know of any outfitters in the Eastern Cape that do. This year we shot a 37" Cape Eland, 57" Cape Kudu and 9.5" mountain reedbuck, reedbuck. All of them are SCI Gold by some stretch and all were charged the same as if they were SCI bronze.

It's not common practice in SA so be careful when painting all outfitters/PH's with the same brush.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
But then the inverse: Ph claims they "hate" tape and number hunters....... but then why do they charge incrementally more by size ?

And this does not just apply to Africa.
I hunted Montana as a vistor hunter and the guides and outfitters charged Bison by Size
(age)

And as we all know, the difference between a bison & a buffalo is you can't wash your hands in a buffalo!

Sorry about that...... I just couldn't resist!

More seriously, I was never much of a fan of the record books & lost ALL faith in them some years ago when someone I know to be absolutely as flaky as you could possibly imagine when it comes to trophy entries got themselves accepted as measurers.

Ah Mr Watson:

Been there done it and got the T shirt so to speak.

You must certainly have heard the term "vleis koedoe " ( "meat kudu" or meat animals ) vs trophy animals. After all we ( South Africans ) invented the concept Yep as true as braaivleis, pap en tik and vellies with no socks.

Anyway I am a huge fan of RW for no other reason that it is in a way a historical picture of African hunting. We spent many hours poring over the pages of RW when hunting a new area.

quote:

Originally posted by Cougarz:
I like the record books for what I see them best used for. That being the natural history of a particular species, geography, genetics, etc. but just like anything else in life what one person sees as an aid another takes as competition.

Most of these record books started out in time when the world and what's in it was less generally known to the masses. The books documented what was available, where it was located, its natural history as well as who took what animal by size. They were written by people who were joiners of organizations that represented their interests.

My fathers generation belonged to clubs that gave awards for higher levels commitment. It could be the Mason's Elks or whomever. The point is they valued the achievement of reaching higher levels. I'm sure a few of them gloated over their accomplishments amongst their friends and I'm sure the rest didn't like it even then.

A club like SCI is no different but the current generation looking at them is. People now are far less the joiners of groups and in fact tend to look at them with either disinterest or even suspicion.

Maybe SCI does need to change to match modern times by minimizing the focus on awards. Maybe they need to be more reactive to the challenges that face hunting today. But the only way to make that happen is to participate in those changes. Everybody can complain but very few today are willing to participate to change what they don't agree with.

Record books are no more than a recording of our interests as hunters, there's nothing wrong with that. Yes a few people will always take things bit too far but the best way to deal with that is to ignore them and focus on the positive things that clubs like SCI do.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
Ah Mr Watson:

Been there done it and got the T shirt so to speak.

You must certainly have heard the term "vleis koedoe " ( "meat kudu" or meat animals ) vs trophy animals. After all we ( South Africans ) invented the concept Yep as true as braaivleis, pap en tik and vellies with no socks.

Anyway I am a huge fan of RW for no other reason that it is in a way a historical picture of African hunting. We spent many hours poring over the pages of RW when hunting a new area.

Yes, I've got the whole wardrobe on biltong / meat hunting vs trophy hunting but this isn't the same as charging trophy clients per inch for bigger trophies. This isn't commonly done in the Eastern Cape. I was specifically referring to trophy hunting and the record books.

Here in the Karoo, we don't really eat pap except at breakfast and you'd be stupid not to wear socks so maybe it's different here

Some of us old guys are not trophy minded anymore. I used to be, but now the most important thing for me is being in good country with a good PH and Tracker and making a good shot. Having a good sneak on a tricky old animal is the best, even if we don't get him. Also, I like a couple of jokes and a little danger too.

I like Victor's approach to things. He has a nice balance.