Everyone has different tastes and desires. That is what makes life in a free country enjoyable. I wouldn't want to push my tastes on anyone. That said, I personally feel the obsession with racks to be absurd and a philosophical mistake. Speaking for myself, the quality of my hunting experience is not related to the size rack of the beast I kill. I am as happy taking a doe as a buck, probably happier because typically the meat of the does is better. In my short big game hunting experience I have taken one pronghorn doe (no pronghorn bucks), three whitetail does, and two whitetail bucks. The desired result of a hunt for me is to obtain good meat for my gourmet feasts, and good quality game meat satisfies that objective very well. I also want an enjoyable hunt, which for me has particular elements to it. I want to feel like I have solved the "hunting problem" myself, designed a hunting approach or method on my own. Thus, I'm not attracted to a guided hunt because the guide would be solving the hunting problem, I would just be the final instrumentality of his hunt. I prefer to hunt from the ground, from impromptu ambushes -- at least for whitetails. I like to use different ambush spots rather than reuse old, tried and true locations. I like hunting with rifles and have no interest in bow hunting or muzzle loader hunting. I acknowledge these are a bigger challenge to the hunter, but that just doesn't attract me. I feel a romance for high power centerfire rifles with a scope, and thisfeeling for such rifles is part of the fun of hunting, preferably rifles with beautiful walnut stocks and glossy blued metal.

I prefer to hunt in a unit with a high probability of drawing, even though non-trophy animals are expected, rather than submiting for a draw in a limited entry area many years before being drawn. That isn't hunting, that is hunting 1/3 the time or 1/10 the time. Because the size of the rack doesn't correlate to the quality of my hunt, this works well for me.

When did the size of the rack become the principle objective of hunting or even one of the main objectives of hunting? I think it is partly caused by the commercialization of hunting. Think about it. What better way to persuade people to spend a whole bunch of money on hunting equipment than to realign their hunting values so the size of the rack was the all-important parameter? Isn't it worth spending $1,600 on your binculars rather than $300 on your binoculars if it improves your odds of taking that B&C buck by 1%??? Now, if any old buck or doe will do, I submit that you can go afield and succeed with your grandpa's .30-30, blue jeans and a flannel shirt, and a buck knife 110, and you can hunt on some good ol' boy's property that you know from high school. But if you have to have a big rack, well now you need to be getting a tag in a hot region, and the outfitters have the leases secured on these places, and you will have to pay those outfitters top dollar to hunt with them. At least this seems plausible to me.

Its a free country. Everyone can hunt they way they want to. I agree, to me it is the hunting experience that counts and not the size of the rack.