Atlasman:
FINALLY....a dialogue. And PLEASE, please don't take this the wrong way.....but the difference is...yours WAS a gun kill!....lol
If where I hunt is the "suburbs"......I'd hate to see some "country"
I have myself (to your defense) called what I do "suburban" deer hunting. So....understandable was your assertion.
It's all about perceived accomplishment........I didn't care for your qualifying of my deer this year as a "gun kill" anymore then you cared for my reference to yours as a "suburbs kill". We all know how hard we have to work for our kills and any perceived attempt to lessen that feat is usually not taken well.
We are just as guilty on this side of the fence.............some feel slighted to varying degrees when their 100" 3.5 year old bucks receive less fanfare then the 130"-140" shot in other areas........even though they are both what is considered a "good deer" for each area.
To be 100% honest...."I" have never felt this way. People who know where I hunt and the herd around these parts know what a "good" deer is, HERE. What gets me is when people from afar thin Im just making this stuff up! A 100' deer is as good (+/-10") as I've ever seen on the hoof, here. Gospel.
I can say with little doubt in my mind that if I hunted the corn belt I would not feel too good about guys on the east coast implying the only reason I bag big deer is where I live..........because the opposite is certainly true.
Again...."IF" that were the case....I'd feel slighted, too. I've NEVER said anything other than (just as you haven't) there are MORE big deer in certain pars of the country. That ain't rocket science.
I've commended your season on several counts. I've done so in the past....stating much of what you said in your original post. You had a great season.....but that diminishes NOT your previous ones. You hunted hard for what you got.....and you took what YOUR woods gave you.
Kudos.