Poll
Question:
What should be included in record books for animals?
Option 1: Score Only
votes: 2
Option 2: Score and State
votes: 2
Option 3: Score, State And County
votes: 3
Option 4: Score, State, County & Hunter's Name
votes: 31
What are your thoughts on record books for scoring animals?
I want the whole story
Not sure how to answer that one.
I always thought a hunter's smile in the picture, the measure of his heart, and his intent, was a great way to judge an animal.
Great to have the record of what animals may produce, just for comparison, and the places they were killed. As for the hunter's name, or mine being identified with the animal, I could care less.
God Bless,
David B.
I agree with Hookedspur. If it is a record, I want to know who did it.
Quote from: Hognutz on October 07, 2011, 09:43:32 PM
I agree with Hookedspur. If it is a record, I want to know who did it.
x2
I think they should omit the hunters name. But if they did that there probably wouldn't be many critters that would get entered.
Quote from: guesswho on October 08, 2011, 03:37:01 PM
I think they should omit the hunters name. But if they did that there probably wouldn't be many critters that would get entered.
Maybe leave it up to the hunter as to whether to include his name or not.
All other info required.
Quote from: guesswho on October 08, 2011, 03:37:01 PM
I think they should omit the hunters name. But if they did that there probably wouldn't be many critters that would get entered.
To each his own, there is no one forcing anyone to enter or inquire about a record or who entered it. Good luck hunting to all who enjoy and congratulations to all who have been fortunate enough to take a superior animal that qualifies for whatever record book recording they choose to view and participate in.
I think it's all about the animal. Give the animal it's just due. Does that sound weird?
TRKYHTR
Quote from: TRKYHTR on October 09, 2011, 03:47:30 PM
I think it's all about the animal. Give the animal it's just due. Does that sound weird?
TRKYHTR
Thats my thought's as well.
I agree with a lot of the sentiments expressed on this. To me, it is all about the intent of the hunter. With a close inspection of a record list, you can get a pretty good idea of whether someone is recognizing the animal they harvested, or if they are just trying to get recognition for themselves by having their names listed a bunch.
At the same time, I am sure there are folks that have just taken a bunch of record animals that list them solely so that those animals will be recorded for posterity.
Personally, my one listing in the record book was entirely because I thought the animal should be listed for its own sake. If it wasn't for that, I would have never done it.
Quote from: link=topic=13420.msg150750#msg150750 date=1318519052
I'm not much into record books for animal parts.
My thoughts too.
Quote from: barry on October 09, 2011, 11:28:15 AM
Quote from: guesswho on October 08, 2011, 03:37:01 PM
I think they should omit the hunters name. But if they did that there probably wouldn't be many critters that would get entered.
Maybe leave it up to the hunter as to whether to include his name or not.
All other info required.
i agree with this. around home record book quality animals are on the rise.
I know when you look a state wildlife and fisheries website at the state records, it can be a good thing or a bad thing. It gives a good indication of what and where a good many record quality birds or deer have been taken. Now if your researching to do a out of state hunt, that info can be of value. If you live locally to that spot, you end up with a lot of strangers running all over you.
Giving props to a animal is what 99% of us do here by showing what we harvest. We are proud of the game we take and if it's a sho nuff biggun, I can see where getting it in the record books should happen. Now if it's some $15,000 deer that was genetically engineered on a ranch to have some nasty trash on it's head, I dont believe it should be entered. That's another subject on it's own though.
I like the record books to see what kind of animals an area might produce, but they really don't tell the whole story because lots of hunters will never enter an animal. But if you see a certain county listed over and over that is a place I want to look into!
I have killed several deer that would qualify for the P&Y book but haven't ever had one entered. If I ever kill a B&C with my bow I will might have it entered due to how hard it is to find an all time B&C book buck.
I don't really care who harvested the animal, just give the animal its due as a trophy.
Rick