THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM AMERICAN BIG GAME HUNTING FORUMS


Moderators: Canuck
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Stupid SCI record book question
 Login/Join
 
John Frazer
one of us
posted
I'm an SCI member but have never looked at their record books -- in the latest issue of Safari there's a story about a moose hunt where 7 hunters took "Top Ten" moose.

Does this literally mean what it says? That in one whack a single group of hunters displaced 7 of the top 10 record heads? Or does "Top Ten" mean something different in the SCI book lingo?

John
 
Posts: 1246 | Location: Northern Virginia, USA | Registered: 02 June 2001Reply With Quote
HunterJim
one of us
Picture of HunterJim
posted Hide Post
I expect the author really meant something like "all record book moose", rather than all top 10. It is infrequent to see a top 10 animal. I have scored two such in several years of measuring for SCI, and one was in the last month.

Now that I think back, it was three and not two.

jim dodd

[ 01-21-2003, 01:48: Message edited by: HunterJim ]
 
Posts: 4166 | Location: San Diego, CA USA | Registered: 14 November 2001Reply With Quote
John Frazer
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by HunterJim:
I expect the author really meant something like "all record book moose", rather than all top 10. It is infrequent to see a top 10 animal.
You'd think the editor would catch that.
 
Posts: 1246 | Location: Northern Virginia, USA | Registered: 02 June 2001Reply With Quote
KevinNY
one of us
posted Hide Post
there are many ties in the book, the top 10 might constitute 40 animals. Also check for what subspecies it was, some are not commonly hunted. Kind of like line class records for fish.
 
Posts: 1567 | Location: NC | Registered: 10 June 2002Reply With Quote
rick3foxes
one of us
posted Hide Post
I believe the article was about a Russian species of moose, so there may have only been a handful in the books to start with.

Rick.
 
Posts: 1099 | Location: Apex, NC, US | Registered: 09 November 2001Reply With Quote
Wendell Reich
one of us
Picture of Wendell Reich
posted Hide Post
I read the article and the same thisng came to my mind. I believe Rick3fox is right. I believe that they are refering to the "Top 10 of Russian Moose"

They were some darn big Moose though ...
 
Posts: 6295 | Location: Dallas, TX | Registered: 13 July 2001Reply With Quote
John Frazer
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by KevinNY:
there are many ties in the book, the top 10 might constitute 40 animals. Also check for what subspecies it was, some are not commonly hunted. Kind of like line class records for fish.
Both good points, hadn't thought about ties (although it depends how you count them -- I notice that B&C gives an actual count, e.g. the top pronghorns are numbered 1,2,3 and a 3-way tie for #4, then they go straight to the 7s -- so there are still not many more than 10 "top ten").

And the subspecies argument makes sense, especially since this was an early hunt into a new area.
 
Posts: 1246 | Location: Northern Virginia, USA | Registered: 02 June 2001Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2025 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia