Public vs Private

[Whitpirate]

I think folks put far too much importance on a good damn record book.

[ICEMAN]

Let's revisit his original post;

He stated: I think they should be catorgized sepratley. The public land bucks should always over rule private bucks

I have several problems with this suggestion;

1. The suggestion causes a divide to be formed in the hunting community.

2. There is no clear agreement as to what "Private" land will be defined as. IE: Private land open to the public, the transient nature of wild game (the "what if's" of where a deer came from or ended up laying), etc...

3. Unrealistic and divisive proposal. Image the difficulty of verifying which type of land any game animal was "officially" killed on. Are hunters to now log the GPS location of every kill as an entry requirement for the record book? You gonna just trust where someone claimed their deer was killed, or are we going to open a whole new spectrum of arguing and distrust between hunters?


There are already enough reasons for guys to gripe, argue and feel jealous about anyones achievement. The last thing I want is a whole new plethora of reasons for guys to doubt, blame and distrust each other. 

[Atroxus]

I think private land gives a huge advantage to harvest an animal over public, because you generally have some established food source that draws animals to a given area. Unless it is managed specifically for trophy bucks though I think that is really only an advantage for meat hunters rather than those looking for a record class animal.

With that said though I think B&C records already exclude high fence type hunts and fair chase is required to be eligible for entry. Someone correct me if I am wrong though.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

[CedarPants]

Let's revisit his original post;

He stated: I think they should be catorgized sepratley. The public land bucks should always over rule private bucks

I have several problems with this suggestion;

1. The suggestion causes a divide to be formed in the hunting community.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!

We have a hard enough time uniting on issues as it is, why would we throw yet another elitist attitude in the mix to further divide us?

Go hunting.  Have fun.  If you shoot a book buck, I'll shake your hand and tell you congrats no matter where you shot it

[bearpaw]

I don't like these kind of topics for the reasons many have mentioned. I think there is too much jealousy and animosity involved and you can read that in some of the comments.

In my business and when hunting for myself I hunt both types of land, private and public. We lease numerous ranches in the states we hunt and we have permits to hunt many different public lands. In most cases we see far more animals on private land so the hunting is easier, but many of our favorite hunts are public land hunts and most of our biggest trophies have come from public land.

To illustrate my point, go through the B&C and the P&Y and consider where each world record came from. I have not done this, but I have a ben franklin that says the majority of world records came from public land.

The animals can go freely between property types and high fenced ranches are not allowed in B&C or P&Y, plus SCI has seperate categories for estate hunts. This seems like a mute topic to me.

[300rum]

Sour Grapes.

I have gotten into much better hunting on public ground v. private.  It is just harder to do.  I just got back from Idaho and I swear I was hunting in a ZOO, big bulls and bucks everywhere! Then you hear the story of the guy driving up a road and shooting a masher, which is fine too. 

If I could be hunting commissioner for the day I think i would just get rid of Boone and Crockett/Pope and Young and just go to some liquid displacement method of scoring that gave true total credit to the animal and what they were able to grow.   

[hogsniper]

I just think all the deer have a massive disadvantage when I enter the woods!    Just sayin......

Ok that was me putting humor into a completely worthless thread!  LMAO

[bearpaw]

If I could be hunting commissioner for the day I think i would just get rid of Boone and Crockett/Pope and Young and just go to some liquid displacement method of scoring that gave true total credit to the animal and what they were able to grow.   

  Agreed, there is a system, I think it was called the burkett system that does exactly that, but it never really caught on.

[bobcat]

I think folks put far too much importance on a good damn record book.

 

[huntnphool]

Im not sure what your point is huntnphool, of course the numbers would say public land has more bucks killed off it as 90% of the people hunt PUBLIC ground.

And thsat was the point I was getting at, the OP said private land was more "productive" than public and therefor gave a unfair advantage, I simply disagreed.

[DBHAWTHORNE]

The purpose of the record books is to honor the animal...not the hunter. The OP is more hunter focused.

[Todd_ID]

I agree DB!  I think the record books should not have the hunter's name listed at all.  That would solve much of what is wrong with hunting today.

[runamuk]

I agree DB!  I think the record books should not have the hunter's name listed at all.  That would solve much of what is wrong with hunting today.

but if you don't appeal to the humans need to be recognized and applauded and told how cool they are your record books would sit empty    Its a nice idealistic concept that record books are for the record of animals but lets face it record books are for making people feel cool for killing the biggest baddest bestest beast and then being acknowledged for it...

as I have read and watched more and more it seems Washington in general is a more trophy minded state rather than a hunter minded state its promotion of successful harvest is limited by split seasons, special permits, raffles and draws and and making it harder to harvest rather than easier they use the nature of competition to continue this hunting promotion of non harvest hunting.  I don't think they care if anyone ever kills anything in this state to be honest, if they did then hunter success would be far higher in the priority list across the board.

[WonkyWapiti]

I think folks put far too much importance on a good damn record book.

I don't give a hoot about a darn record book.  For me it's about celebrating the animal, the story behind the hunt, and the total experience.  But for the sake of argument let's say you've got someone hunting private land that busts their butt vs someone who steps out of their truck on public land and drops a toad.  This is why records mean nothing to me.  Let's celebrate the hunt, not the numbers.

[PolarBear]

The purpose of the record books is to honor the animal...not the hunter. The OP is more hunter focused.

That is what S.C.I. is about, they don't give a crap how or where you killed it, just that it is a good sized critter.