While reading the latest hunting report a thought crossed my mind. Many hunters are "not into tape measures" for their trophies, in fact, it seems to be frowned upon. But universally everyone tells the weight of the ivory of their elephant. Other readers demand it. Why the double standard?
Jim

Tradition held over from the old days of professorial ivory hunting and due to the difference in nerve in the tusks genetic differences from area to area weight is a good standard IMHO

quote:

Tradition held over from the old days of professorial ivory hunting

When ivory was hunted for profit I remember it was going for 17 shillings to the pound and sport hunting of elephant was almost unheard of as were professionally conducted hunting safaris for overseas clients.
It would be reasonable to assume that hunted ivory retained this system of measure as a norm which later saw the introduction of additional information on circumference and length for each respective tusk for the record books.

fujotupu,
+1

I think my point was missed. The question is not whether elephant trophies are measured in weight rather than length. The question is, " Why is measuring an elephant in either method OK, but frowned upon for other trophies?"

jhaney. Excellent question. Folks talk about "dagga boys" and other older animals past their breeding prime etc. but do not seem to use the same language for elephants. Perhaps because the taking of elephants is so tightly controlled and therefore you take what you can get, unlike a buff.
I await the response from more knowledgeable hunters.
Peter.

Natural curiosity in my case.

I am amazed sometimes at the variance in the perceived weight versus the actual weight of elephant tusks.

quote:

Originally posted by jhaney:
I think my point was missed. The question is not whether elephant trophies are measured in weight rather than length. The question is, " Why is measuring an elephant in either method OK, but frowned upon for other trophies?"

If I recall the recognized way of recording tusks is total length on outside curves + lip circumferences.
For reporting purposes the weight is normally quoted as it gives more value to the trophy - similarly so for Leopard (by some)

Interesting question. I'd never thought about that, really. I don't seek inches, but as I have my first bull ele hunt next year, I have been thinking about pounds! Not that I wouldn't be as satisfied with a more modest trophy, but there is still an allure to "white gold."
Perhaps adding to that is the amount written about poundage in the historical accounts of ivory hunters. From Bell to Buckley to Boyes, Foran to Taylor to Nyschens, they all write about how big were the tusks and how many total pounds were shot. Trophy hunters are not ivory hunters, but we like to identify with them.

In some countries, Tanzania for example, there is a minimum weight or length.

Personal preference! Preferences become popular - well because more people have the preference.