On a recent hunt, I hunted out of the same camp with a very nice guy that was very focused on shooting animals that met certain SCI criteria for a medal. He was also focused on taking certain animals that would complete some award within SCI.

I am not knocking this or the hunter. He enjoyed his pursuit as much as I enjoyed mine. He was a bit focused on being sure his animals met a criteria.

My question for you is -

1. Do you make a shot decision on inches or mass or maturity of the animal?

2. Do you make a shot decision or destination decision based on adding an animal or animals to a list that would qualify for recognition by SCI?

What are you thinking when you decide to shoot is what I am getting at?

Please no flame throwing here. SCI set their system up because someone or some committee decided it was important. I am after your criteria for pulling the trigger...

THanks

quote:

Please no flame throwing here.

HaHaHaHaHaHaHahahahahahaahahahahahahaahahahahaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My criteria is for good mature animals and most importantly to hunt hard and have fun.

I have never asked a PH if it was an SCI medal animal.

I do not even consider the SCI record book when I hunt. I could care less. I will admit to entering animals from my first 2 safaris long ago but no more.

I do like to know the measurements just so I know.

I think I would have to answer "yes" to #1 but with a qualification. I would not shoot juvenile animals. Let me put it another way. Would I shoot a 35 inch kudu? no.

1) I want mature animals- if I am in an area with great genetics, I try to take something known as good for the area, but age is #1. That being said, I would shoot a mature 6 year old 400" elk over a 9 year old 320 elk in a heartbeat. I have passed up some really big whitetails that I thought were only 3.5 years old. Conversely, I have shot hard bossed buffalo on the first day of a hunt that were only 34-36" wide. They were old.

2) NO - I am not a species collector or record book guy whether it be B&C, SCI, etc. I have never entered a big game animal in a book, but I think it is fine that people do, and fine that people are collectors. We are all different and that's what makes things interesting.

quote:

Originally posted by Thomas "Ty" Beaham:

quote:

Please no flame throwing here.

HaHaHaHaHaHaHahahahahahaahahahahahahaahahahahaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's to hoping....

quote:

Here's to hoping....

Buwahahahahahahahahahaha!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

no, nada, never, not in the least....

I like shooting old males, big old males are a bonus.

I also like shooting old females or females that don't have young.

Sometimes I'd rather shoot varmints.

I've put a couple of animals in B+C, and after having done so, came to the realization that absolutely nothing changes in your life when you "make the book". I have nothing against goal oriented hunting per se, but it doesn't make a difference to me anymore. Sure, once in a while, I will pick up the book and look at my name in it, but that has long since lost it's magic. It's really about the animal anyway. Since taking those Caribou and Mule deer, I have taken many more animals that would make SCI, but frankly, I just don't care anymore about the book. Just my opinion.

I've NEVER entered any animal in any record book, SCI or otherwise, and have no intention of ever doing so, and I've shot a butt load of animals in many places around the world. The record books never even cross my mind or that of my guide or hunter.

I've never measured anything. I hunt for me not anyone else. Now the hunter mentioned in the first post, in my opinion (and its my opinion only) is his life that shallow that he has to hunt for an award? I just don't get the award thing. I also don't like hunting being called a sport but if we are giving out awards and trophy's then its a little sportish hey.

I like shooting old males, and the bigger the better. I just like the looks of large horns or antlers, regardless of any score.

On hunts outside my home state of Montana, I generally like to hunt animals that I have not shot before. My resources are limited, and I would like to experience new and different hunts.

I had a couple North American animals officially scored for B&C, but I have not entered them in the book.

I have measured a number of my animals myself, just to see how they would score SCI, but I have never had any of my animals officially SCI scored, nor do I intend to enter any of them in SCI.

I did, however, register 15 of my North American animals with Grand Slam Club/Ovis to qualify for their Super Ten.

I do use the SCI Awards Magazine basically to see what animals are available. I have hunted enough different animals to qualify for a number of the SCI Awards, but again, I have not entered anything.

Not in the least. In the US, I am a subsistance hunter. Would rather shoot a doe or a cow for meat.
In Africa, Old, past their prime males are my main goal.

I agree with all the above and I have never entered any of my trophies even though I have what would be some very high scoring/ranking animals I'm proud to have been fortunate enough to take.

BUT...I do think the various Scoring systems including SCI give us good "benchmarks" to gauge what is truly exceptional and what is not and SCI DOES give you sort of Three levels to "gauge" the relativity of trophy quality

We would all be disingenuous if we didn't say we have certain benchmarks like this we hold sacred:
The 100 lb elephant bull
The 50 inch Sable
The 60 inch Kudu
The 40 inch Buffalo (or even the 50)
The 60 inch Marco Polo
The 50 inch Giant Eland
The 40 inch Ram
The 10 ft Bear
Etc....etc....

Of course there is a difference between that and being an SCI Narcisist

To answer the question as posted- ABSOLUTELY NOT,,,

I would answer yes to question 1 but my hunt is not ruined because I do not shoot an animal that makes my standards. I've been around hunting and hunted myself enough so that I have a pretty good idea of what is a reasonable expectation for the animals I'm hunting and if I shoot that it's fine and if not that's fine too. As for records and goals mine is to complete 20 safaris and shoot 100 species. I don't specifically book every hunt with that goal in mind but it is always in my head. None of that has anything to do with record books or rewards. It's just my personal goal.

Mark

Mass, length and maturity.
I rather hunt certain species multiple times ( over and over ) as those get my jollies going and I feel challenged and I probably will never hunt other species as they just don't interest me
Might use SCI book as somewhat of a measuring stick when it comes to comparing and describing my trophies with other fellow hunters
Never entered any of mine in any book, simply why?
At the same time, not looking down upon guys that do...
Looking at that this way, Who goes hunting whitetail, shoots one and says I'm done, I got one on my wall.
Hunting is hunting unless you are collector

It doesn't drive me, but I have entered one into Rowland Ward - got the certificate, done that.

I would do it again, since the whole idea behind Rowland Ward and the reason they allow pick-ups to be registered is that their record book was a reference work.

Let's say you wanted a large harnessed bushbuck - pull out Rowland Ward and see where most of the top 100 came from - book your ticket to that place and go get one.

So I'm doing it for other people .....

No

No

quote:

Originally posted by dogcat:
On a recent hunt, I hunted out of the same camp with a very nice guy that was very focused on shooting animals that met certain SCI criteria for a medal. He was also focused on taking certain animals that would complete some award within SCI.

I am not knocking this or the hunter. He enjoyed his pursuit as much as I enjoyed mine. He was a bit focused on being sure his animals met a criteria.

My question for you is -

1. Do you make a shot decision on inches or mass or maturity of the animal?

2. Do you make a shot decision or destination decision based on adding an animal or animals to a list that would qualify for recognition by SCI?

What are you thinking when you decide to shoot is what I am getting at?

Please no flame throwing here. SCI set their system up because someone or some committee decided it was important. I am after your criteria for pulling the trigger...

THanks

First question.


Maturity.

Second question.

Make sure it does NOT qualify for any silly award. I would pick an old bull with worn down horns. Or an old animal with broken horns.


My only time of sharing a camp with an individual who placed animal size above all else was rather memorable.

He came along with us to hunt in South Africa.

He was never satisfied when he came back to campo and someone else had shot an animal bigger than his.

He took over the conversation at the dinner table, telling us all sorts of lies about his day's hunt.

To the extent that his PH was asking later - "Was Mike talking about OUR hunt??"

If I had any doubts about the true characters of those striving to be in one "inner circle" or another, he made sure I was left with non.

1.) Yes, on any or all of those. Inches & mass float my boat.
2.) Never. By seeking the above a very few of my trophies qualified for SCI's record book and have been entered. It's not an ego thing. I appreciated having that resource available for my hunt research and thought it proper to contribute. That's also why I submit to The Hunting Report, another valuable source of hunting info.

I like to shoot mature animals.

No interest in entering anything in the SCI record book. However, if someone wants to, no worries from me.

I hunt because I enjoy it. I do not care about others legal ambitions

No.
I really just want to hunt.

1). Yes

2). No

The way the first question is worded, it is impossible not to answer in the affirmative. We all consider at least one of those things -- length, mass, maturity -- when deciding if an animal is appropriate to kill. I agree with many others, maturity is most important, but once that is met, I'd like some mass and inches. Do I carry a tape? Never.

The second question is easy. SCI medals and awards are completely meaningless to me. I've never entered an animal in the books. Frankly, I've never actually measured an animal. I've been told by PH's and taxidermists what particular animals measured, but they were not measured at my request.

I don't like sharing camps and I think it's because I don't want to compete with another hunter, only myself and the animal I'm hunting.

Yes and no. Yes because they dictate the price of some animals and no because I hunt for the experience and not the size of the head gear.

Yes, I'm an unmitigated and unapologetic trophy hunter. I like harvesting the big ones. I also eat what I harvest, unless I can't for good reasons.

I use the B&C and SCI record books and their scoring systems to help judge relative trophy size. The SCI book is relatively easy to get into, but the B&C is very tough.

I want the biggest and (as important) oldest buck, ram, boar, tom, stallion, billy, bull or other male that I can find.

Nohing else matters.

I won't intentionally shoot a female or a youngster, although I have done so out of ignorance or by mistake.

I have come home, on many occasions, empty handed and disappointed, but happy nonetheless, because of these standards.

I see a mix of priorities but generally all will want to hunt hard and make every effort to enjoy their safari. The trend is to go for mature and to strive to take the best out of the area.

It is the likes of us to be able to provide that opportunity and to be honest about the expectations of individual goals.

I like to take mature animals. That's about the only criteria I use. I will measure it long after the fact when the trophies are home. the measurment isn't a factor as to whether I'm pleased with the animal or not. Taping horns or antlers in camp takes away from why I'm there hunting.
The answer to #2 would be no, but if certain specie I take was able to grow a record set of head gear or skull then out of respect and recognition for the animal I would put it in the book. Probably not SCI unless it was a top ten but B & C yes because they have much higher standards.

The SCI book has absolutely no bearing on the animals I take or where I hunt. I don't take
"trophies" but focus only on mature animals likely to be past their reproductive prime.
We aren't supposed to flame but I think that
if you are interested in inches the SCI standards are pretty low anyway so it doesn't
take much to make the book.

Never considered any "book" when I hunt, could not care less! I am a trophy hunter, but I trophy hunt for myself - because its what I love to do. I'll always try to find the biggest/oldest animal that I can, as that's part of the "experience" I enjoy most. Hunting to me isn't a contest - its an obsession that I am very passionate about. Some guys hunt for awards, recognition amongst their peers, etc. All that's fine, I just choose to hunt because its in my blood.

1. Absolutely, maturity, mass and inches all are things I consider before taking an animal. Maybe not all three in the same animal, example an old scrum cap buffalo... I would shoot him in a second if I had the shot. On the same hunt, if I had a second buff available and a mature 45" buff stepped out... I would shoot him too! For the same reasons, mature and a trophy in my eyes.

2. No. But caveat that by saying I love to travel to different areas and countries of Africa to hunt. If there is a species there I have not shot and it is on quota, I would like the opportunity to hunt it. I am not a "box checker" but love hunting something new and different for the experience. I have never entered a head in any books.

quote:

1. Do you make a shot decision on inches or mass or maturity of the animal?

2. Do you make a shot decision or destination decision based on adding an animal or animals to a list that would qualify for recognition by SCI?

1. Yes, if I'm trophy hunting I am looking for the biggest set of horns or antlers I can find. Could I tell you what the record book score or minimum inches for it is - no, and I don't care either. I generally know what a good trophy is and can tell you when a nice set of horns has gone into the class of exceptional.

2. Nope, I hunt places and species because I want to.


I will say that the SCI awards and record books (in general) have made my hunting more expensive. Not because I care about having my name in a record book, but because other folks do, which drives up the demand and cost of certain species. Perfect example is ibex in Spain - the bigger the ibex you shoot (based on some record book scoring system), the more that animal costs. Pretty sure the system did not start out that way.

quote:

Originally posted by Sevens:

quote:

1. Do you make a shot decision on inches or mass or maturity of the animal?

2. Do you make a shot decision or destination decision based on adding an animal or animals to a list that would qualify for recognition by SCI?

1. Yes, if I'm trophy hunting I am looking for the biggest set of horns or antlers I can find. Could I tell you what the record book score or minimum inches for it is - no, and I don't care either. I generally know what a good trophy is and can tell you when a nice set of horns has gone into the class of exceptional.

2. Nope, I hunt places and species because I want to.


I will say that the SCI awards and record books (in general) have made my hunting more expensive. Not because I care about having my name in a record book, but because other folks do, which drives up the demand and cost of certain species. Perfect example is ibex in Spain - the bigger the ibex you shoot (based on some record book scoring system), the more that animal costs. Pretty sure the system did not start out that way.

Much of Europe prices this way .

Only for zebra.

#@$@%@%!$#@$@%*@*@%^%#!^%@*@(&*@%&^@$&^@%f^*^*^k record book

In 20 plus years of hunting I am not aware of a single client of mine that has entered his trophies into the SCI record books. This includes a 64" kudu and 46" dugga boy that went 125 sci points with nice hard bosses etc etc. The fact that I know the sizes does mean that we are aware of the SCI scores and these give us a bench mark for our trophies only. End of the day its all about the hunt, having fun and shooting a mature animal and nothing about seeing ones name in a record book!

Buzz and all,
From the responses, it seems nearly 100% of us do not participate in the SCI awards programs. Are we a minority or are the ones that participate scared to say so here.
If we are not participating and we are a sizeable cross section of the hunting public, how do they get enough folks to participate to make it worthwhile?
Something is not adding up.

There may a website - www.inaccuartereloading.com out there for folks who are SCI prize participants. I would like to hear from them if they care to state an opinion.