Author Topic: record books (Read 2218 times)

rex6666 · « **on:** October 01, 2007, 11:01:54 AM »

i am not an Exotic hunter, not against it just haven't done it.
I have a feeling about exotics, if they are on public land then put them in the record book
if they are on private land especially high fenced then i don't think the should go in the record book, like bass caught in private lakes. To me high fenced ranches have the ability to breed and feed animals that are not the norm, and that goes for all animals.
that is just my opinion.

BUTCHER45 · « **Reply #1 on:** October 02, 2007, 08:31:41 AM »

What about the high-fence ranch's that do not put and take? Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there ranch's out there that have self-sustaining exotics on a very large number of acres? I have heard of BIG ranch's that have less hunters per acre than the the Oregon wilderness does during Elk season.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that not all ranches are created equal. I don't feel they should all be painted with the same brush.

Graybeard · « **Reply #2 on:** October 02, 2007, 08:54:30 AM »

Yes there are both kinds. BUT before we go too far down this path let me reiterate the rules for this forum. This is NOT the place to be arguing the merit of game ranches or high fence hunting. On this one forum it is accepted as OK and not a point of argument. If you wish to argue it take it to one of the other hunting forums NOT this one. This one is for discussion among those who accept it and wish to do it not for those detractors of it to argue with those who support it. I have plenty of other forums here where you can do that.

rex6666 · « **Reply #3 on:** October 02, 2007, 09:32:02 AM »

I stand corrected

markc · « **Reply #4 on:** October 03, 2007, 06:43:49 AM »

Thanks GB, I just logged on and saw this post. I think the high fence argument has been debated on the Texas forum a whole bunch of times.

Graybeard · « **Reply #5 on:** October 03, 2007, 07:57:55 AM »

Yup Texas Forum is an excellent venue to argue it as would be the General Hunting Discussion Forum. We've definitely argued it at length on the site many times.

rex6666 · « **Reply #6 on:** October 03, 2007, 09:29:27 AM »

I am sorry but i was not arguing about high fences, i was talking about The Record Book

Graybeard · « **Reply #7 on:** October 03, 2007, 12:08:58 PM »

Understood and we're not taking you to task by any means just kinda clarifying the rules regarding this one forum. You can discuss the record books here if you want that's not inappropriate. But what I brought up my comments for was to clarify that this forum is set up for those who do hunt exotics which most often takes place on high fenced ranches of some size and it is a given on this one forum that that is an acceptable practice and that I don't allow folks who are opposed to it to harrass the folks here about it.

Now I have plenty of other forums on the site and folks are free on those to argue against exotics hunting, high fence hunting and such all the want.

Only on this one forum here which is for the discussion of that topic by folks who enjoy it are we limiting disagreement/arguement of the issue. Even here not all comments negative are prohibited. I commented on one particular ranch that I saw no hunt in what they were doing at that one location myself.

As to the record books to be honest they are mostly a joke especially the Records of Exotics ROE book. It's just one more way for one person to make money on folks who hunt on other than his ranches. SCI is the primary real record keeping organization who deals with the animals classified by us as exotics and they have much more strict rules as I understand it on what can and can't be listed in their books.

I enjoy the hunting but have no particular use for the record books myself.

markc · « **Reply #8 on:** October 05, 2007, 02:20:45 AM »

GB, you brought an interesting point. A couple years back I shot a New Zealand Bilile with my Taurus .44. It was a nice animal, not necessarily a difficult hunt, but still enjoyable (not for the Billie). A couple of months later I received a letter in the mail from the ranch owner telling me that the Billie I had taken was the #3 that year taken with a handgun, and for a certain amount of $, I could have it placed in the ROE and receive a nifty plaque for my wall at home. While I thought this was pretty neat, I began to wonder if this was the #3 on this particular ranch, or what? Needless to say, I did not send in any $ for the privilege of having my name in the ROE, or for a nifty wall plaque. I do still have the head and horns though, sitting on my porch waiting to be made into a european mount or something.

I suppose if I someday shot a world record something or other, I might be interseted in having it in a record book, but really the appeal of record books doesn't interest me too much.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #9 on:** October 05, 2007, 03:18:43 AM »

When you hunt a critter in a fenced area where he is not normally found then the critter should not be recorded along side the critter born and raised in its natural habitat . A separate book fine !
This is not meant as a negative , I have shot wild boar ( wild ? ) and pen raised birds , Both were enjoyable and i intend to repeat both . but neither was a true hunt . The size of the pen can make the shoot more difficult for sure and more realistic but its still not the same as hunting open spaces . And to compare the two on equal merit for the record books seems to not be fair to the critter born and raised in the wild .

Graybeard · « **Reply #10 on:** October 05, 2007, 03:45:46 AM »

ROE really has NOTHING to do with wild critters and is about animals taken on high fenced ranches that is pretty much 99% of what's listed. It's really a huge rip off. Once long long ago in a land far far away I took a really nice Axis deer while hunting with the folks who publish that book. They twisted my arm to have it listed in the ROE book and told me it would be listed forever so folks could see how mine compared to that of others. What a LIE. It stayed one edition only and was taken out before the next edition was printed. It seems that shortly after that they changed so that it covers only the animals shot each cycle between printings there are so many being shot and added the size of the book can't hold all of them.

Back then it was $35 to have it listed and $35 for the plaque so I paid $70 and was ripped off big time in my opinion. I've never made that mistake since. As I said in my opinion ROE is a joke. A bad one at that.

drdougrx · « **Reply #11 on:** October 06, 2007, 04:37:32 AM »

Hi Guys,

Been off line for a while....whatta busy week.

Anyway, I used to be record book guy and have quite a few in various SCI editions. I am even an SCI certified measurer. As I matured mentally, now there's an oxymoron, I use whatever measuring skill I have to asses the value of animals that I see when hunting. Now.. I have a pretty good idea what a fully mature, gold medal animal is supposed to look like and about what it should cost. For example, I went to a ranch in NY and the guides were touting their "gold Medal Fallow" and the over the top prices. The guys that were there were shooting them and really bragging about how huge they were and the guides were encouraing them. Really, without even taping the racks, I'd surmised that the best one taken was no more than 180 or so SCI points where you need about 235 to even make the low end of the SCI Gold Medal category. At one point on the second day, I arrived very late on the previous day, the guides were pushing me to shoot and then showed me an animal that had thin palms, short points, a tight V shaped spread and no more than 23 or 24" of length. The head guide said that this deer was a top record book head and that I wouldn't find one as good anywhere on the east coast.

The kid that I was hunting with from the other party got that...oh my God... a real once in a lifetime trophy look ....for only $1,500. I respectfully passed as I'd shot more than a few that were significantly better. My point is, had I not had the Book to compare against and actually measured at least dozen fallow, I may have been hosed as this kid was. I didn't have the heart to tell him he got taken.

I use record book entries to assess the value of the trophy size vs. the money. Here's another example, I have a top ten angora goat that measures 85 SCI points. It has 37" horns per side. The curls are very deep. I wasn't even hunting these but saw him and realized that for a few hundred, I would have a hell of a trophy.

Really...how do you know what a good trophy looks like until you have something to compare.

NOW......if you work really hard and hunt a long time in arduous terrain and get a animal, it's a trophy. BUT....FOR ME..when the animal cost begins to resemble a zip code, I want something to compare it to.

So...ROE...ia gaff IMHO. SCI is the standard for me and I use it as a reality check.

GTG....chores to do...will check in later.

rex6666 · « **Reply #12 on:** October 17, 2007, 05:07:27 AM »

WELL!
i guess i need to learn to express my self better most of you guys especially G.B. and Mark
have said exactly what i wanted to say. you too SHOOTALL ( almost forgot you)
THANKS!!

markc · « **Reply #13 on:** October 17, 2007, 11:14:56 AM »

Doug, that was pretty funny about the cost resembling a zip code.
Here's a question??? What makes a record book legitimate? I know there are a few of them now, Pope and Young, Boone & Crockett etc..etc.. So what makes one book more legit than another one? Thanks, I'll hang up and listen.

1187VX2 · « **Reply #14 on:** October 18, 2007, 07:34:26 AM »

OK, I'll have to admit that I enjoy the ROE books. The used books can be had for $ 10 - 15 and they have lots of pictures of all the exotics. And like Doug mentioned, they are very useful in determining what an animal scoring a certain amount should look like. My last exotic hunt in Texas was for a Sika deer and through the ROE books it was pretty easy for me to decide that the deer I'd be interested in (and would be willing to pay for) would need to score xxx and up.

Now obviously the ROE books are a money maker, a little self serving (the guy that puts them out runs a ranch, right?), the record qualifications are low and anyone who wants to enter an animal can - just pay the price. With ROE, saying it is a gold medal animal doesn't mean that much - most aren't that impressive until they are well above the gold medal minimum.

They do feature animals that SCI ignores, though.

SCI is certainly a good organization - but you're not going to find a used records book for $ 15 either.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #15 on:** October 18, 2007, 07:36:21 AM »

the scoring system used !
Va. has its own system of scoring deer so if you enter the Va. big game contest it will be scored with their system .
Where other systems may give you a higher or lower score for same head .
It all depends on who you want to impress or what crowd you hunt with .
in some cases its when the head is scored , green or dry !

drdougrx · « **Reply #16 on:** October 18, 2007, 01:12:54 PM »

Hi All,

It's my opinion and only my opinion that ROE is more generous with their scoring than SCI. ROE I think, I may be wrong, focuses on mass while SCI focuses on length. No matter, the price of a silver medal animal may be the same as a gold medal, or, more often than not, a rancher may charge gold medal prices for silver medal animals. Point in fact, I went to a ranch with little time to hunt before I had to leave to go home. Long story short, the owner tried to sell me a sheep that was a Gold Medal in his eyes under the SCI system. Because I have some experience (I'm an SCI certified measurer), I know I was looking at a low scoring silver. You may say, "Well...so what?" The "so what" was the price. He wanted $1,300 for this sheep because he said it had 30" horns. Huh...I surmised no more that 24 or 25" horns with a good, 9 or 10" base. So I told him, yeah right, that sheep won't make even a middle range silver and again...I said...make a deal with ya. IF that sheep scores 30" horns and a gold medal (green) I'll pay ya double. If not, I'll pay ya half. We joked and joked and joked and he wouldn't let me shoot the sheep after all. Anyone else might have been taken. It works for me because I like to hunt exotics. Not for everyone...just me.

markc · « **Reply #17 on:** October 19, 2007, 05:31:49 AM »

Shootall makes a good point which brings me back to my earlier question. What determines which record book or organization is legit? Is that even a question that can be answered, or in reality is it just up to the individual hunter to determine if a particular book or recording organization is legit? Or, would it make sense to have an animal recorded in more than one book, if it in fact qualifies for more than one? Or does it all really make any difference anyway? LOL

drdougrx · « **Reply #18 on:** October 19, 2007, 07:26:42 AM »

Hi Markc

It really is up to the hunter as to which scoring system to use. B&C does not recognize high fence or exotics. ROE allows everything to qualify. SCI, in my opinion, scores and records animals which are mature and, again, imho, have appropriate size. So, what I'm saying is, a gold medal SCI fallow appears as a BIG rack and an SCI silver medal fallow appears as a better than average rack, etc. In whitetail jargon, not all 8 point bucks are the same. There's a difference and I feel SCI helps me tell the difference and permits me to "get my hands on" allot of racks so that I do. Here's another example. I shot a bison with my nephew last year. I made the decision that I was NOT going to shoot the herd bull because of its physical size as well as the expense (close to 3,000lbs and $4k). So, I shot a 3 year old with nice horn and will make a hell of a trophy. But, the horns do not even qualify for an SCI Bronze medal, but do qualify for an ROI silver.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #19 on:** October 19, 2007, 09:09:42 AM »

so you use it to value you hunt , now that make good sense !

drdougrx · « **Reply #20 on:** October 20, 2007, 02:43:08 AM »

Correct!!!

BUT....I am truly sorry I have even gotten involved with trophy hunting. Makes me think about the cost rather than the experience sometimes.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #21 on:** October 23, 2007, 02:47:09 AM »

I went on a boar hunt and the enclosure had all kinds of critters , at first everything looked good but after three days and alot of looking the Elk in particular showed alot of differences . It made me realize the need to educate yourself before putting alot of money in a hunt in the wild !
Hey enjoy your self , have a goal !

Graybeard · « **Reply #22 on:** October 23, 2007, 03:12:17 AM »

Before making my first exotic hunt I bought an ROE book and looked at all the photos and studied the dimensions of all the animals I was interested in as well as how to measure them. I think it helped me to decide which animals to shoot and which not to shoot. Beyond that tho I don't think much of the idea of records as kept by ROE. It is an educational tool tho for a first time exotics hunter in helping decide what is and isn't a trophy. I'll never again register an animal with them however.

markc · « **Reply #23 on:** October 24, 2007, 09:06:28 AM »

GB, on one of thsoe ranches, or at least with one outfitter you and I have both hunted with in the past, the record book they have is a neat little book to look at, but like drdougrx is saying too, it is helpful or entertaining