Number of Trophies vs hunting skills

11 April 2004, 16:36

I am starting this thread as a result of a hunter on this forum suggesting, that the size of ones trophy room and the number of trophies in it, are a representation of ones hunting and shooting skills.I have seen some very impressive trophy rooms that belonged to some average or below average shooters that weren't outstanding hunters either.They used a very large budget and a great deal of time spent on guided hunts or on private ranches or hunting preserves around the world and accumulated a very large collection of impressive animals.It is therefore my belief that money and time spent in the right hunting environment will often result in a more impressive trophy room than superior hunting and shooting skills.What are your thoughts on this topic?

11 April 2004, 16:43

Val

I agree with you completely. This is particularly true in places like California where there is little prime public hunting areas. You pay to go on private property on guided hunts to get results.

11 April 2004, 17:19

Chuck Nelson

I find it amusing that someone who has such disdane for nothing but cold hard facts would start a thread based entirely on uneducated self drawn conclusions, conjecture, and heresay!

Chuck

11 April 2004, 17:25

4bambam

It is to bad it is becoming a rich mans sport any more and the little guy is having to give up time spent hunting. Just like here in Utah next years Limited Entry Elk hunt is going to jump $100.00 in one rate hike. Along with every thing else going up and the stupid extra money spent here trying to plan on what to do with the wolves and how much to hand out for damages they cause. They are more concerned with the Elk than the Deer we are in trouble with here in Northern Utah as to the Wolves also. So while I can afford to go hunting, it is in my best interest to get my results with my own skills in whats left of our Wilderness or Public lands and use what I know as to Bag my game with out paying an arm and a leg for. Sorry if I got off track a ways.

11 April 2004, 17:43

RMK

Given access to private property or public land that has limited access to the public,anybody can kill "trophy animals". The only supposed skill,is being able to hit the animal with the chosen weapon.

11 April 2004, 18:14

fredj338

The size of ones trophy room & the trophies suggests a hunting skill but it really only means the guy/gal gas the money to pursue their hobby. According to my African PH, many of the trophies shot on safari are finished by the PH. That is more the measure of the hunter.

11 April 2004, 18:36

stubblejumper

Quote:

I find it amusing that someone who has such disdane for nothing but cold hard facts would start a thread based entirely on uneducated self drawn conclusions, conjecture, and heresay!

Lets start with shooting skills-I shoot regularly at the same range as these people(the only one within 250 miles) and I do get to see how well they shoot,therefore I can make an educated assessment of their shooting skills with no hearsay involved.If you can't hit a target off of a rest at the range your shooting isn't going to be more accurate in the field.

As for hunting skills-I have hunted in some the same camps as some of these people(in the times that I have booked guided hunts)and I have hunted several of the same areas, so while I am not with them at all times in the field, I do get to see some of their actions in the field and some of the ways that they go about conducting their hunts.We are also in the same fish and game club so I am usually aware of the game that they take,and the circumstances involved usually through the hunters own bragging and pictures.Again my conclusions are based primarily on actual observations and the hunters own words and pictures.

As for the time that they spend on guided hunts,again they are usually anxious to pass around the pictures and bragg about the hunts so it is easy to know.As for the cost of these hunts,anyone with a computer can look up the hunt prices.Again conclusions based on the hunters own words and pictures and on actual outfitters price lists.

11 April 2004, 18:39

OldFart

I get the feeling that the purpose of limiting access is to grow alot of big dumb animals, to satisfy the hunters who do not have patience or dedication to go earn a real trophy. I watched a show today where I doubt the hunters ever got 100 yards away from the truck, and they were whining about the cold the entire show. Its a shame in the sense that we may be losing the appreciation for how wise some of these animals really are, and what they have to go through to survive.

I realize that a working man is limited in the time and money they can throw at the sport, and that limited hunting is needed at times to keep the herds healthy.

But to at least one old timer, I question whether the Walmart special approach to trophy hunting is a good thing for the sport.

12 April 2004, 05:11

Oscar Makonka

Some of the most skilled hunters I know have no trophies on the wall, Have only a .22, shotgun,and a rifle and know how to use them. They can't afford guided hunts and are some of the nicest people I know.

11 April 2004, 20:34

MtnHtr

SJ,

I agree with you to a certain extent. Alot of large trophy collections are obtained thru spending some big $$. These guys never really learn how to rough it on their own, go in to new country, find animals and hunt em. Too much reliance on guides, stocked up private ranches etc. Usually they are businessmen pressed for time. But on the other hand, I know some excellent hunters who are well off and hunt mostly public land and have a few trophies to show for their efforts.

Everyone hunts differently on different budgets and has different reasons for hunting. Personally I don't care for the snobby types who rate a hunter by the size of their collections or how much "shooting game" experience they have. Luckily this is a small majority, most hunters rich and poor are good people for the most part.

For myself, I enjoy getting off the beaten path, finding game and hunting em with the company of a few good friends. Success is usually measured by trophy quality instead of quantity. Once in awhile we do a little meat hunting as this is usually more relaxing than trophy hunting.

Public land is full of fellow competition so it pays to be a saavy hunter................

MtnHtr

12 April 2004, 01:25

p dog shooter

I have only been on one paid guided hunt. What the money brought me was axcess to private land with plenty of game. The guide had hunted for years and knew where they could be found. Very little hunting skill involved.

I would have liked it a lot better if I would have showed up in camp and the guide said there are elk in them hills and here a map go at it. I had a good time if you don't mined being lead around by the hand.

Money buys you axcess to many places where there is game try going to alaska with out it you don't get very far unless you have very good local help ie. freinds that are will and knowlegeable about the area you are going. They also must have equipment and be willing to take you out.(some places you can't guides are repuired by law.)

With money you call up Joe blow the guide and out fitter and say I'll be there on this date be ready. They do all the work know the area really well(hopefully) and can put you into game. If you have the time to go to a new area spent the first couple of years getting to know it and the game you can do good. You might even get lucky one of the first years you are there and shoot something nice.

But that is only one area and maybe one or two types of big game. Now try and fill your trophy room with lots of differant stuff. It will not happen buy it's self.

Yes money makes a big diferrents is it bad or good that all depends on the person doing the hunting or shooting. Would I be going on more guide big game hunt for things I can not shoot around here if I had more free income to spend on them YOU BET I would. I just can not see myself spending a couple of year in all the places I want to hunt learning the area and game.

That said with my income now I well most likey only go on two or three fully guide hunts in the rest of my life. I'll try and make them the best and enjoy them. Would I like to go and more shoot more stange and wonderfull game you bet I would well it happen right now most likely not. Well some slob with more money then he knows what to do with and could not find game with out his guide do it yes. But that is life. Well some hard working sole that saves and saves to go that is a good hunter go also yes well they both have a good time I hope so.

I all I can hope for is that I with my encome will be able to enjoy what I can with out worrying what the other guy is doing. Am I jelous somtimes yes. But I'll get over it and try to work a little harder to get what I want.

12 April 2004, 04:09

BigNate

While I have yet to pay for a guided hunt, I do hope that one day I will get the chance to hunt Alaska. This requires a guide by law, and is somewhat spendy. It's how things get done there. I would like to reserve the right to experience it.

That said, I'm not impressed very often by peoples stories about what a great hunter they are while on a guided hunt. Guides are there to lead them to the animals, usually are the ones judging trophy size, and then telling the hunter which animal to shoot. This is shown on camera, told in stories in books, magazine articles, and even in the front yard of my house on one occasion. These people pay for a trophy hunt. The outfitter tries to make them happy by getting them what they want, some people the guides actually enjoy being in the field with them, sometimes the guide is wondering why he ever got into it in the first place. It all comes back to the individual I think.
When the story includes the prices of each event, and brand names of the equipment he was using, it pretty well tells me the individual is wanting me to be impressed by his disposable income.
I know a guy who shot a small black bear that didn't look to good in hide quality either who had it full mounted for the same cost as the hunt. Basically he paid a lot of money to sit in a blind overlooking old doughnuts and shot the first bear he saw. Big whoop!
When the story is about an un-guided trip into the backcountry with a couple of friends, the description is not of how much money was spent, what brand names were used,ect. but of how it looked, how cold, the beauty of it, and the animals that were seen, that is a hunt to admire. Those people bring home trophies that might not make it into any book, but are trophies to those involved.

Money can buy almost everything. But it can't buy the experience of accoplishing the same thing without it!

12 April 2004, 05:16

sidewinder

I never really even thought about this kind of &*(^#! till I read it on here. I guess I'm a bit jealous. NOT!
What you say probably is true in some cases.
Here is the way I look at it. Why would someone go on multiple hunts in all corners of the world unless they LOVED to hunt. That is all that matters. If you have the resorces why not fill a trophy room too. Cool!
Say your going to Africa, or wherever. I'll bet far more people would do everything they could to prepare for the trip. Including, new guns, practice etc.
I'll bet you if you asked these (what you call unskilled hunters) if they had a good time. They would be AMPED... BIGTIME!
The gratification one gets out of the way they hunt is theirs. Whether its with a guide, PH, or they like to do it on their own. I prefer to do things myself. I could book some trips with a outfitter if I wanted. I buy more toys and go more often instead. I have used a guide twice in my life and had a great time. There are some animals and places that I want to go were there is no choise but to use a guide and PH.
I dont't care if Jim Shockely or Chuck Adams bought or earned their animals. I say good for them.
There you go...for whatever its worth.
sidewinder

12 April 2004, 05:31

Hawkeye47

Sidewinder,

I have been fortunate to have hunted worldwide and have several trophies that are SCI Gold Medal quality. i have never had them officially measured nor will I. Some of my most precious trophies are not my biggest but each one has memories that are priceless!!! Jealousy is a green eyed monster and I have had trouble from people,that I have known all my life, that are jealous because of my success in hunting. It seems that they don't have the initiative to do what a working man has to do to be able to hunt worldwide. Most spend more on fancy toys, liquor, tobacco, and such than I do hunting. It all boils down to what's important to the individual. I choose to save my extra money for hunting.

Hawkeye47

12 April 2004, 05:58

sidewinder

Hawkeye,
I have a good friend that makes less money than me. Which is'nt much. lol ! He has been to Africa twice! AHHHH! I HAVE TO GO THERE. That is where he has funneled his money.
When I said toys in my post, I ment guns, fishing rods, reels, trucks, and boats.
I AM JEALOUS...

Congrats on your success and hope you have many good trips to come.
sidewinder

12 April 2004, 06:05

kutenaymtnboy

I have spent a great deal of time in the most isolated wilderness areas of B.C. and Alberta, doing a job that paid far less than I could have earned elsewhere. I did this because I wanted to be "in the bush" and this was the only available method of satisfying that desire.

I have also hunted and been on three wilderness, outfitted trips, none of which I enjoyed as much as doing it on my own. I actually prefer to hunt alone as most of the hunters I know in my age group(late 50s) prefer to talk rather than hunt. I will, this year, start taking one of my nephhews with me as I have no kids and he wants to go.

Trophies mean squat to me, real bush skills and seeing new country mean everything, each to his own. I will only go on guided hunts in areas where I cannot get access to the animals any other way; but, I understand why others have different priorities.

I would add that I think "Big Nate's" final comment, given above, is one of the wisest remarks I have heard/read in a long time.

12 April 2004, 18:37

stubblejumper

Quote:

On that wonderful note, I'm done with this forum

That is wonderful news chuck.By the way did you really shoot that elk behind a high fence?

12 April 2004, 13:44

Madgoat

I believe that many of these so called "great hunters" who have so much crap hanging off their walls, and who talk about buck deer using numbers and "G1's, G2's, etc" are not into hunting at all...this is just a big dick contest. To them it is more about "getting the big one" than having a good hunt & experience...and they are prepared to spend the $$$ to do it. Heck, there are folks out there willing to buy trophy class animals (without even having gone in the field themselves) to hang on their walls!! What kind of logic is that? ONce you look at it, many of these folks would rather sit in a truck all day and shoot one out the window than hike around a mountain top for a week and not fire a shot. That isn't hunting...just killing.

It seems to me that the really great hunters don't need a trophy room to prove themselves. They are the ones who when tired will walk over that next ridge, sit until they are almost frozen waiting for that elusive buck, and glass until every inch of countryside until the bino's almost fuse to their skin. They aren't afraid to put a LOT of work into a hunt, and don't have to brag about their skill. For them, the hunt is a great experience whether they harvest an animal or not...plus they don't need some outfitter holding their hand the entire time.
I'm sure with enough $$, you could have a trained monkey harvest a lot of trophy class animals too.
MG

12 April 2004, 15:00

huntsonora

I have hunted with guys that have more money than they know what to do with and I have hunted with guys that saved for years to be able to go on a fully guided hunt in great areas and from what I have found, being a good hunter is not indicitave of net worth. To try and stereotype "rich" hunters as bad hunters is extremely irresponsible. If you really want to see people that have no idea what they are doing try spending a morning in an easily accesible area on opening morning on public ground. There are guys out there, rich and poor, that have no idea what they are doing. SOme of the best hunters I have hunted with have a pile of money, they shoot regularly and come to camp fully prepared to hunt as long or as hard as necessary to try and harvest the animal they came for. To try and distinguish who is a better hunter by tax bracket makes no sense, there are people in every bracket that have no business hunting and on the flip side of that coin, there are guys in every bracket that are terrific hunters that would do good on public or private land because they hunt smart and hunt hard.
After reading some of these well thought out posts it makes me feel a little better about what was said about one of my friends in another post. Some of you guys just want to rag on anybody that has either more "trophies" or more money than you do. Its pretty pathetic really.

Drummond

12 April 2004, 15:04

huntsonora

RMK,
I'd bet a dollar to a donut that you would have a damn tough time trying to kill a big deer on some of my private ranches in Sonora. Just because a guy hunts private land there in no guarantee he will kill something unless there is a large high fence surrounding it. From my experiences, in areas that produce high quality animals are usually low in numbers of that particular animal. Just a though to think about...

Drummond

12 April 2004, 15:23

Madgoat

Just what I would have expected coming from an outfitter. Do your clients expect to go home with a forky horned mule deer??? Do they pay you with food stamps?? Camp probably looks like a wing off of Cabela's.
All I'm saying, is that there are folks out there who don't give a rat's how they get the big one ($$, illegal, buy, steal, etc) they'll do it. Just because a guy has a lot of critters on his wall, doesn't mean he is a good hunter. How many poor folks do you know that rack up thousands upon thousands of dollars in taxidermy anyhow??
All I'm saying, is that there is NO correlation between trophies and a hunter's ability. Shoot, I know dudes who have more money than God that are fantastic hunters. They just don't have to prove it by making their home look like a museum. Most of these guys are trying to prove something, or making up for something they lack.

MG

12 April 2004, 15:43

huntsonora

How is this, there are guys out there that have big animals on the wall that would not know a big deer if it bit them on the behind. I have also seen guys that have very little money stumble onto giants as well. Any "hunter" should be able to spend just a few minutes with somebody and figure out if he knows what he is talking about or not. Maybe thats just the "outfitter" in me because we usually have a "hunter" pegged as to skill level in about 5 minutes of talking with him

Drum

12 April 2004, 16:03

stubblejumper

Quote:

Maybe thats just the "outfitter" in me because we usually have a "hunter" pegged as to skill level in about 5 minutes of talking with him

And you may be right in the majority of cases,but there are people that talk the talk and walk the walk right up until the action starts then they freeze up or panic.Other people that have less experience or don't communicate as well may rise to the occaision under pressure.I have hunted with many people over the years,and just when you think you know someone they sometimes surprise you.

12 April 2004, 16:07

Chuck Nelson

Who really cares! As I stated at the beginning; conjecture and heresay with people making some pretty big assumptions.

Chuck

12 April 2004, 16:09

Madgoat

You quoted "How is this, there are guys out there that have big animals on the wall that would not know a big deer if it bit them on the behind. I have also seen guys that have very little money stumble onto giants as well."

I don't know...maybe someone told them it was big?? Who cares, a trophy is in the eye of the beholder...whether it be a forky or a 30" buck. Heck, I know a guy that has a 39" mule deer that he has thrown out in a barn and left to the mice. Also, does your second statement suggest that poor folks can only hope to "stumble" on a big critter because they are lousy hunters??
I guess my point is that a guy doesn't need a lot of stuff on his wall to prove he is a good hunter, and many times those that do usually aren't that great of a hunter and need assistance. In a perfect world, it would be an even playing field (no guides, private land, canned hunts, etc) and only then could we really tell who the great one's are.
And if your suggesting that your "5 min" with me has pegged to my hunting ability, why not just say it. We're amongst friends here.

MG

12 April 2004, 16:18

stubblejumper

Quote:

Who really cares!

Chuck-It appears that no one really cares about your opinion of the topic.

12 April 2004, 16:33

Chuck Nelson

LOL

Chuck

12 April 2004, 16:49

huntsonora

I have no idea how good of hunters you guys are, I have not spent any time around you guys. In order to "guage" ones ability you need to interact with them and ask a few questions to see how they answer. They say that you cannot BS a BSer and I think that this is true with most experienced hunters.

Drummond

12 April 2004, 16:56

erict

The size and number of trophies one has is directly related to:

1. 'Prime' hunting land,
2. Skill,
3. Time,
4. Desire.

Money can only get you so far.

12 April 2004, 17:04

Chuck Nelson

The point here is quite simply everyone is different. You cannot under any circumstance categorize every hunter into some kind of mold. As an example, on a hunt this fall, I guided 4 different combo whitetail/mule deer hunters. One was inexperienced by his own admission, and lazy by my observation. He went home with a good mule deer but missed two shots at the same 160 class whitetail at different times of the hunt. Another had alot of experience but was so out of shape, getting him opportunities at mature animals was a chore. He killed a 140 class whitetail and a 150 class mule deer but didn't work for it, the guides did. The third guy was a know it all who drew blood on one heck of a whitetail (he was scared to death of his rifle) and passed up several opportunities at mature representative mule deer. The fourth was there to hunt hard, was pleasant to be around, and willing to go the extra mile to reach his goals. He killed a 155 class whitetail, and a 165 class mule deer with a shot apiece. He earned them fair and square. So on this hunt the number and quality of the trophies going home with these guys WAS representative of their hunting skills.

What does it prove. Absolutely nothing.

Chuck

12 April 2004, 17:35

stubblejumper

Quote:

The size and number of trophies one has is directly related to:

1. 'Prime' hunting land,

2. Skill,

3. Time,

4. Desire.

Money can only get you so far.

Very true.But money can buy you access to prime hunting land.It can buy you a skilled guide and being wealthy can allow you more time to hunt.

The whole point of this thread was not to say that wealthy people that hunt with outfitters are poor hunters or people of lesser means that hunt on their own are better hunters.Neither statement has any basis in truth.This thread came about when one hunter on these forums wanted to compare trophy rooms with another hunter as proof of his hunting and shooting skills.The point of this thread is that you can't judge a persons hunting or shooting skills by the number or the size of his trophies.A person can have a large trophy room full of trophies and he may be a great hunter.Then again he may have just spend a lot more time hunting in great areas with good guides because he can afford to do so.A person may have few trophies but he may ge a great hunter that has little time to hunt or maybe he has taken some trophy animals but can't be bothered to mount them because it isn't important to him or he can't afford the cost.Then again he may be a poor hunter that isn't very successful.The bottom line is that a persons trophy room is not a fair measure of his hunting and shooting skills.

12 April 2004, 17:57

Chuck Nelson

Quote:

This thread came about when one hunter on these forums wanted to compare trophy rooms with another hunter as proof of his hunting and shooting skills.

To be fair, you ignored the other 2/3 of that post, that offered references among other things. The trophy room comment was only part of the equation. Please share the entire story. Good grief, I posted a picture of a Bull Elk a couple of months ago with a brief account of the hunt, and now according to one poster here and some "credible sources" I shot that thing behind a high fence right here in good old Southern Alberta on an obvious phantom game farm!

Chuck

12 April 2004, 18:21

stubblejumper

Quote:

But if you're interested in professional references who are familiar with my use of the rifle, just ask, and I'll supply all necessary contact info, plus books, videos, magazines, etc., that you can look up for yourself.

While you're at it, post some photos of your trophy room, and I'll do the same, and we'll see how much you've done with rifles besides punch paper.

There is the missing material.I am afraid that books, pictures and magazines will not likely show much more about a persons hunting or shooting skills than the pictures of the trophy room would.As far as professional references go they may be of some value but the term professional would indicate that they may be guides or outfitters.If they were being paid by the hunter and he was a regular customer, there would be a question of objectivity.The point that the hunter bothered to mention the trophy room pictures indicate that the hunter thought that they were a measure of his shooting skills.

12 April 2004, 18:30

Chuck Nelson

Well, at least it proves your reading comprehension skills aren't up to much!

On that wonderful note, I'm done with this forum. It has become nothing more than a chest pounding, backstabbing, character attacking free for all. Quite frankly it doesn't have much content anymore. Threads like these just prove that point.

Chuck

12 April 2004, 20:26

ncboman

hmmm,

I'm more of an avg guy that has killed lots of deer. When I get a good one, I try and put it on the wall. I kinda think the deer deserves it.

I'm proud of my mounts although most do not make the book. If I were wealthy I do not think my esteem for the mounts would differ but I might have more and bigger ones.

I could probably go to Africa if I wanted but I get extremely high satisfaction levels bowhunting mature whitetails and my wife needs another minivan. lol.

Having a nice trophy room would be great but having the time to fill it would be better. I do not see how a trophy room is the measure of a man but I would like a big trophy room nonetheless.

13 April 2004, 02:44

Reloader

I too have seen "Trophy Rooms" that were based solely on the amount of money in the guys bank account but, I have also seen quite a collection of skulls and piles of horns at a low income household. To me, the man that doesn't have the huge exotic trophy room or the big pocket-book has accomplished much more in the skill of hunting.

I have personally taken over 100 big game animals and not one of my trophies has come from a guided hunt. I have been on guided hunts but, I just haven't had the success that I have hunting on private or public land hunts. I believe that there has to be alot of skill and marksmanship involved when you are capable of being very successful w/o being rich. I spend countless hours in the field and on the range. I feel that for me to be succesful in the field, I must learn the game I am after, what his food sources are, and his main travel routes to these sources. I spend countless hours at the range to train my shooting skills to the best of my ability so that I can make an ethical kill and all of the hard work pay off.

When I take an animal, that I have spent countless hours scouting for, the reward is priceless. I take so much pride in the trophies that I have been able to take and I thank God for the ability to do so.

The high priced trophies in todays society is a result of the impatient, fast paced world that we live in.

To me there is nothing better than taking a bruiser buck on land that my Great Grandfather hunted years ago. It makes that trophy much more meaningful.

Reloader

13 April 2004, 05:41

BigNate

I'm not sure why this subject seems to have rub some the wrong way so much. Possibly they feel they are the ones who have trophy mounts on the wall that were the result of something other than skill.

Most of the posts here indicate that the opinion is that the mans trophy room does not reflect his skill as a hunter. This is one area that is being painted with to wide a brush. Trophies are nice but how it got there is where the real treasure is, or at least should be.

I may have given the impression that I think all well-off hunters are lousy, un-ethical hunters. This isn't how I think. I wanted to point out that a person of average means may very well have great skill and not be able to afford the purchase of access fees to prime ground, travel to high quality areas, taking time off to hunt as much as they want. Money is a factor in what's in a trophy room, even the cost of having one mounted can be restrictive.

The one deer I've taken that is a true trophy to me, I never had scored, and couldn't afford to have mounted at the time. It will be one set of horns that will be around for many years. It represents an accomplishment of mine that I'm proud of. It may not be the biggest, but it was my biggest blacktail, was old, and I tracked it into it's bed. That to me is a trophy.

13 April 2004, 06:46

<Guest>

I think everyone could agree that in most cases the amount of success one has in hunting is relative to the amount of time one spends hunting. But that amount of time could be because one is unemployed and has a lot of time, or because one has a lot of money and therefore can pay others to take care of his business affairs while out hunting.

Moreover, the right environment is important. I certainly am not going to shoot a record class Bighorn Sheep here in Minnesota. Again, money may have or may not have anyting to do with it. One could hitch a ride to the hunting fields, or fly there in his Learjet.

When it comes right down to it, a person has to have hunting skills to be consistently successful, or be with someone who has those skills. You have to know the habits of the game you are after in the area where you are hunting, as well as how to take advantage of the wind, the terrain, and probably most important, how to manage you own limitations as a human being in the wild.

It is not even debateable that there has to be a trophy where you either do or don't spend all of that money to either hire or not hire that guide, and where you do or don't spend all of that time. And then you have to be able to get close and hit it.

To be pretty simple about it, being in the right place at the right time will result in a trophy room. Whether those trophies are "impressive" or not depends considerably on the subjectivity of the person forming the opinion.By that I mean that I might think that somebody's 125 class whitetail is a great trophy because a poor guy worked damn hard on public land for a whole season to get it, whereas somebody else might think that a 175 class whitetail isn't all that impressive because they have had the opportunity to see larger ones on private ground. Or vice versa.

Lastly, this topic isn't worth losing friendships over!!!!

blue

13 April 2004, 09:46

Mikelravy

I detect a fair amount of jealousy involved in this string. So if you guys did have the money would you go? Would you be a better or worse hunter for it?

13 April 2004, 10:04

<Guest>

Mike

To directly answer your question, I am not jealous of anyone. But if I had a lot of money I would certainly go hunting more. As I posted on another thread, the older I get, the more and more I want to be out hunting, but the less and less I want to shoot anything. So If I had a lot of money and a lot of time I still probably wouldn't have an "impressive" trophy room because there might be hunts where I might want to get close enough to a trophy animal but might not want to kill it.

Blue