Is Trophy hunting detrimental to hunting.

[baldopepper]

Had a interesting conversation with a retired game warden (over 30 years in another state) which started based upon the post having to do with APR's.  He had some interesting thoughts concerning deer hunting (since the APR post was on deer, that was the emphasis of the conversation).  He is very saddened by the new emphasis on trophy hunting and thinks that in the future it will become a real problem for hunters.  Not saying I agree with him, but here are some of his thoughts:

1) It has created a snob mentality that belittles anyone who would shoot a small buck or, God forbid, an antlerless deer.  This has discouraged many young hunters who don't have the skill or a mentor to teach them skills from getting involved involved in the sport. 
2) The demand for quality (trophy) hunts has led to much property either being set aside by states for limited draw hunts or outright leased by private individuals  to increase their odds of getting a trophy grade animal.  Many traditional family hunting areas have become off limits and many have given up hunting when they lost their traditional areas.
3) Herd management has become very difficult when hunters want the herds managed for trophy animals.  With many hunters now only targeting the biggest and best animals many herds are made up of much weaker stock and are subject to higher disease and winter kill rates.
4) Enforcement in some states has become a nightmare with a checker board of ARP units, special draw units, antlerless permit units, general permit units, and plain closed units.  Checking stations have to take the hunters word that an animal was in fact killed in the proper unit and funding for actual field checks has declined during a period when it's needed most.
5) Trophy hunting has provided  anti hunters with more propaganda as they claim hunters are not hunting for meat or proper game management, all we want to do is shoot the animal to take its head and hang it on the wall.
6) Trophy hunting has driven the cost up.  States and private individuals have taken note that many hunters are willing to pay much more for the opportunity to take a trophy and have taken prices up to meet the demand.  Additionally with hunter numbers dropping yearly, states have increased license costs to offset the volume loss.
Again, I'm not saying that I agree with these points, but it is food for thought.

[Bean Counter]

1) It has created a snob mentality that belittles anyone who would shoot a small buck or, God forbid, an antlerless deer.  This has discouraged many young hunters who don't have the skill or a mentor to teach them skills from getting involved involved in the sport. 

Disagree. I have hit the "trophy hunter" phase of things and I don't have a problem shooting an antlerless animal if it works well. For instance some buddies of mine and myself are applying for Wyoming pronghorn this fall and put in for a couple of antler less tags in addition to the buck tags. Would I have made the trip just for antler less tags? Not likely but this happens to work out.

2) The demand for quality (trophy) hunts has led to much property either being set aside by states for limited draw hunts or outright leased by private individuals  to increase their odds of getting a trophy grade animal.  Many traditional family hunting areas have become off limits and many have given up hunting when they lost their traditional areas.

"traditional areas" that a family has long hunted on public land remain just that--public. As to hunting clubs buying sweetheart deals with large landowners such as Weyerhauser, I agree that this is a problem and should be regulated. As far as mega-guide services go, they seem to be a self limiting problem with the reputations they create for themselves: such as Doyle Moss' crew of 30 guides for one hunter or the reputation of waking their client up in camp when the animal is pinned down and practically has a target painted on it.

3) Herd management has become very difficult when hunters want the herds managed for trophy animals.  With many hunters now only targeting the biggest and best animals many herds are made up of much weaker stock and are subject to higher disease and winter kill rates.

I'm not a biologist but IDK if I buy this. Regardless, even when I was new or taking one of my kids out for their first hunt, I'd rather go in a unit with a 30% chance of harvesting a mature buck than a 50% chance of  harvesting a spike or small Forky.

4) Enforcement in some states has become a nightmare with a checker board of ARP units, special draw units, antlerless permit units, general permit units, and plain closed units.  Checking stations have to take the hunters word that an animal was in fact killed in the proper unit and funding for actual field checks has declined during a period when it's needed most.

What about a hunter, trophy or otherwise, who simply circumvents the check station to begin with? Sounds like a lazy warden.

5) Trophy hunting has provided  anti hunters with more propaganda as they claim hunters are not hunting for meat or proper game management, all we want to do is shoot the animal to take its head and hang it on the wall.

Unless you're talking about Indians, I don't see hunters shooting animals, sawing off antlers, and leaving the meat to waste. We would do far better to turn the light on these "subsistence Indian hunters" as far as turning the public against them and hopefully even taking away their B.S. special privileges than scapegoating a middle class, white hunter who cares more about inches of bone than meat.

6) Trophy hunting has driven the cost up.  States and private individuals have taken note that many hunters are willing to pay much more for the opportunity to take a trophy and have taken prices up to meet the demand.  Additionally with hunter numbers dropping yearly, states have increased license costs to offset the volume loss.

This means more money for management. Is that a bad thing?  Ridiculous fees are usually inflicted on the non residents who have the money and means to travel to another state for a hunt. Hunters like me spend hundreds if not thousands on tags alone across the west and this is money that simply wouldn't be there for mediocre quality hunts. If I weren't able to afford such excursions then I likely would hunt in state, as in state tags are usually the cheapest line item in an annual hunting budget.

[vandeman17]

just out of curiousity, was he a Colorado gamie?

[baldopepper]

Actually he was in Colorado for a few years, but was In Utah for the vast majority.  (one of the old school that actually spent the vast majority of his time in the field and put education and help if front of issuing citations)

[vandeman17]

Actually he was in Colorado for a few years, but was In Utah for the vast majority.  (one of the old school that actually spent the vast majority of his time in the field and put education and help if front of issuing citations)

Reason I asked is that Colorado, at least for elk, manages for numbers more then trophies. Not sure if they are the same with deer but I believe they do.

[singleshot12]

Is Trophy hunting detrimental? All I know is if I see a monarch breeder 5x5 with seven does and also see a young satellite 3pt hanging around near by gut instinct is to harvest the 3 pt. Much better meat and I don't really care about bragging rights anymore I feel much better knowing that the big buck is breeding the doe's,unless some other *censored* shoots him the next day

[BULLBLASTER]

Is Trophy hunting detrimental? All I know is if I see a monarch breeder 5x5 with seven does and also see a young satellite 3pt hanging around near by gut instinct is to harvest the 3 pt. Much better meat and I don't really care about bragging rights anymore I feel much better knowing that the big buck is breeding the doe's,unless some other *censored* shoots him the next day

so because you let the bigger one go and someone else shoots him as a legal animal you call him names?
I like to go after the biggest animal I can but I will also shoot a small one or a cow/doe if I feel like it and its legal.
I wont Judy anyone for trophy hunt only and I also won't judge anyone for shooting any legal animal. As long as they are out there enjoying hunting they are good in my book.

[singleshot12]

I don't know? I just wish the bigger the better mentality would change. You shouldn't be looked upon by others for being a bigger man for killing a breeder. Should be all about the meat not the horns

[BULLBLASTER]

I don't know? I just wish the bigger the better mentality would change. You shouldn't be looked upon by others for being a bigger man for killing a breeder. Should be all about the meat not the horns

so I shouldn't be looking for the challenge in outsmarting and killing a mature deer in his home area? My seasons would be very short if I only wanted to get meat... the meat is a bonus but is far from the only reason I do what I do.

[vandeman17]

I don't know? I just wish the bigger the better mentality would change. You shouldn't be looked upon by others for being a bigger man for killing a breeder. Should be all about the meat not the horns

I understand your logic but remember that the 3 point you shoot might be a young buck with way better genetics then the one you passed on but it just hasn't matured yet. What if that big buck had already bred most the does and many others too? There are so many variables out there that we never know as a hunter so I think going after a good mature deer is neither good nor bad 

[singleshot12]

I'm not telling anyone what to do. Me personally would choose the meat. If I was after horns I would cull out an old buck past his breeding prime. I've pasted on big bucks in breeding prime with their harem of doe's,just couldn't pull the trigger.

[pianoman9701]

I don't agree. But, the conservation benefits that hunting and hunters provide must be emphasized in an educated and approachable manner. Trophy hunters, especially rich ones, mean the difference between extinction and abundance in many documented cases. We have to find ways to get that message out to people unfamiliar with our sport.

Last week, one of my customers posted a picture of a bunch of guys standing over a Southern White Rhino, draped with a US flag. I think the display was tacky, but OK. Anyway, PETA had posted the picture, of course, with some verbiage about "fat white disgusting Americans", blah, blah, blah. Now this customer of mine is a hunter, but considers himself a meat hunter, even though he shot a huge bull in WY last year and posted it all up on his FB page. He was livid about the fat White American hunters and all of his other poster friends were, as well. I did some research. It turns out that since 1968, the revenue from fat white American (and Europeans, too) hunters had not only supported the localities with hunting dollars and stimulation, but had enabled the southern white rhino to increase in population from 1500 to 11,400 animals by 2006. Without the dollars that these trophy hunters spend on hunting these animals, their recovery would never have been possible and their extinction almost certain.

At the risk of his business, I posted an article in his post and turned the entire crowd around. Although most still thought the display was disgusting, they ALL recognized that without those trophy hunters, the southern white rhino would be available to see only in museums by now. This is a perfect example of hunting is conservation. If we educate in a manner which is non-confrontational and respectful, we can show most reasonable people that regardless of whether it's trophy hunting or meat hunting, hunting helps keep wildlife thriving and abundant.

[Bean Counter]

...He was livid about the fat White American hunters and all of his other poster friends were, as well. I did some research. It turns out that since 1968, the revenue from fat white American (and Europeans, too) hunters had not only supported the localities with hunting dollars and stimulation, but had enabled the southern white rhino to increase in population from 1500 to 11,400 animals by 2006. Without the dollars that these trophy hunters spend on hunting these animals, their recovery would never have been possible and their extinction almost certain...

This is pretty much always the case. Regulate it with even half  brain and give the public and local economy a stake in their continued survival, and they will thrive.

[finnman]

I am not a trophy hunter. But you won't hear me bash on someone for doing it.
I am against shooting an animal just for fun or just to put a rack over the fireplace and brag, this is not good for the face of hunting. You kill it you eat it or give to someone that will.
I do agree with the money aspect of trophy hunting, I agree the money in principal is important to wildlife management.
I hate what the trophy hunter mentality has done to many of our younger hunters. You can read their posts on this web site and they sound utterly ridiculous. No conscience, no appreciation, no heart. Its pretty sickening in fact to listen to ones brag about their conquests and then rail on other hunters for tagging immature 2 or 3 points or does.
I can't say I have ever met a meat hunter that was a true jerk. But trophy hunters....well its a different story.

[singleshot12]

  well stated...but in a way you did bash the tophy hunter