Monster Washington bull MM

[ipkus]

Both great bulls and...

I continue to be amazed that 'Huntin' Fool' magazine (December, 2009 issue) and the Carters continue to insist that with respect to their {2010 Overview - STATE BY STATE} and their in-depth analysis of Washington on page 48..that "In regards to the deer and elk we recommend non-resident hunters ignore Washington due to the high non-refundable cost to apply and virtually zero trophy potential. We will cover Washington's sheep, goat and moose units in depth prior to the application deadline but will not cover the deer and elk units for the reasons just stated."

Guess they aren't paying attention to the record book or maybe the pictures of the great 2008 and 2009 bulls from Washington just haven't hit their radar screen yet.

Don't take this the wrong way, but...

...the last thing you want is for Huntin' Fool to start hyping Washington elk hunts.  Why in the world would you want that?  Do you feel disrespected in the whole 'next world record or bust' world that many have turned hunting into?  That's dumb.

Huntin' Fool is a good resource (that I utilize), but it is not without it's shortcomings.  One of it's biggest flaws is how it screws up the draw odds for the units it lists as 'best' for any given state.  They jump dramatically for units that are new to their list (check it out if you don't believe me).  So, is that what you're after?  Branch bull tags are hard enough to draw here as a resident...

Huntin' Fool is one of many tools a serious OOS hunter needs to use in order to make good decisions.  The best info in an issue of Huntin' Fool is often not what they print, though.  It's what they don't...

Luckily, even if HF decided to hype our elk hunts, the way Washington hammers OOS applicants for $$ it wouldn't bring a bunch of extra pressure.  Still, it's not something anyone should be asking for just because of state pride...

[Ridgerunner]

Look at what HF does to draw odds, its terrible.  Better to be under the radar screen, I wish they didn't cover WA at all personally. 

[DWP]

Both great bulls and...

I continue to be amazed that 'Huntin' Fool' magazine (December, 2009 issue) and the Carters continue to insist that with respect to their {2010 Overview - STATE BY STATE} and their in-depth analysis of Washington on page 48..that "In regards to the deer and elk we recommend non-resident hunters ignore Washington due to the high non-refundable cost to apply and virtually zero trophy potential. We will cover Washington's sheep, goat and moose units in depth prior to the application deadline but will not cover the deer and elk units for the reasons just stated."

Guess they aren't paying attention to the record book or maybe the pictures of the great 2008 and 2009 bulls from Washington just haven't hit their radar screen yet.


Did I miss something here?  I do not see where anyone says they want Huntin Fool to cover Washington more, just that he was amazed that they do not cover us more.  But he never says that he is glad that they do not cover WA more either.
Just saying that sometimes we all need to re-read posts more carefully before going off....


Both bulls  are nice.

[DWP]

I agree with Ridgerunner here, the less exposure we get nationally the better.

[nwhunter]

Have no doubt the Carters know all about our big bulls but when you throw WDFW nonres license and elk tag fees into the equation it isn't worth putting in as a nonres. They have to buy the license and tag and its nonrefundable if they don't draw. As a resident I think its great and I wish WDFW would do the same with the sheep, moose and goats and then Washington wouldn't even get one page of coverage in the 'Fool'. nwhunter