RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

EKM .. do you really think that someone who has the "Big Five" hanging on the wall, an Alaskan Brownie rug in the trophy room and just about every other critter out there ... is automatically a better "hunter". I hate to burst your bubble here ... but the 4 guys I know who have actually done it .. the only thing they all have in common is they are rich. Very very very rich. Money and time are the only 2 prerequisites to take the critters .. definitely not "skill".

Now I admit I have a very small cross section .. 4 guys .. and I have only hunted with 2 of the 4 .. but they were not "good" hunters. In bear camp in Maine... hunting over bait... patience, scent/movement control and shooting ability would be the 3 skills a hunter could be judged on. I was there to video tape as I had a bear .. and I wasn't remotely surprised in the 3 nights we sat on stand he saw no bears. One night I did my best to point out a nice bear that hung up about 80 yards out, but he never saw it .. even through his swarovski's. The other man, while being very nice .. wasn't someone I would invite to hunt over MY dog again in grouse country. I love her to much.

They all have great stories from their "hunts" ... but knowing what I know now. I truly believe that money bought the majestic elk over the fireplace .. and the Cape Buffalo... and all the other "trophies" in the game wings of their houses. It doesn't take much skill to walk behind a guide, or PH if you paid to be in the best spot. I give them some credit of course as they made the "shot" and put in the time .... but they certainly aren't better hunters then many of the guys I head into the woods with.

I'm not trying to be argumentative .. I just feel pretty strongly that the size of the gun, or rack of the trophy for that matter doesn't make the hunter ... it's his ability in the field.

RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

Moose
but probably only because i would only be able to do it once, i've been Elk/mulie hunting once with no success , was close but no shots.
and i can get whitetails most years, maybe not tropy class but bigger than more than half the people i know who hunt

RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

“Automatically” and “assume” and “skill & better” are someone else’s terms. I’ve focused steadily on experience and accomplishment and consistently mentioned big game hunting and how it can change/grow you. Some respond to the big game discussion by fixating on gun size instead, apparently interchanging the two aspects and then becoming uncomfortable with the firearm comparison end of it somehow. (Which is odd given that 375HH’s [for an example] are easy to handle “mid-bores” and really a non-issue.)

It’s possible for one’s hunting experience to run very deep but also run quite narrow. This allows someone with less breadth to take glee in finding weaknesses in a hunter with broad (and financially taxing) experience level who is not “up to snuff” in the nuances of the critic’s chosen hunting specialty(s).

I’m sure some folks headed out to take the Big Five/Dangerous Game (a broad endeavor) will be much relieved to know the whole thing is a luxury cake walk requiring little skill, talent, risk, or nerve whatsoever and that these critters that can hunt you back are simply a non-issue and that ALL that will be required is money and time.

One can “dirty up” the word “class” all one wants; however, if one goes out and bags the Big Five and a Brownie and don’t return a different “class/caliber” of hunter than when he left, then he deserves to be shot himself for not paying attention during the whole process.

Good Luck and Good Hunting,
EKM

RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

Im going to agree with EKM on the part whare taking the aferican big five and a brownie takes guts too. I will be honest and say even if I won a free trip to hunt cape buffaloes I would still have to carry spare trousers. I have seen how those big things charge even after being shot.

Im also going to agree with MA Jay and say that just because they shot the big five dosent make them better hunters. There is a big difference between following a PH to an open shot of a trophy cape buffallo, and getting up hours before sun rise to follow tracks and small signs and call for a day and get a really tough shot at a white tail that will put meat in the frezzer while being laughed at by the rich guy who has a full head mount of an elephant.

I don't think there should be levels of hunters. If someone can follow a PH and shoot an elephant, and someone else can lace up his boots and load up his grandfathers .30-30 and go deep into the woods and shoot a 45" mulie and pack the meat out, that dosn't make them any better than someone who goes out to ride on the logging roads looking for a patrage or maby even a deer but is okay with not seeing anything. If the guy who shot the elephant is better than the guy who got skunked than thats your opion. Mine is if they both enjoyed it and were satisfied with what they have done than they are both better than the guy who sits at home and insults those who would pick a spike buck over a 380 class bull elk.

RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

I guess I'd have to say elk. I'm assuming that I'd be hunting with a friend of mine that doesn't care for venison. Hunting with friends has got to be better than trophy hunting without. Now if money were truely not a problem, I was intrigued by a Cabelas catalog of guided hunts that listed a Polar Bear hunt for 25K. If you'd care to start up a collection... :)

I think you sell yourself short. I think that if you were to have/find/spend the cash you could go over there tommorrow and I'd bet that you'd be successfull in your hunt. MA Jay makes a good point - it takes more money than skill to walk behind a guide or professional hunter. I've no doubt that you'd require far less hand-holding than some. You would have seen things and done things that others haven't. Where I differ with you is that doesn't graduate you to another level of hunter. Heck, I've got a nice big fancy BBQ setup. Cost more than all my rifles combined. I've seen things and done things that others haven't. Doesn't make me a better cook! :)

You set up a pretty mean camp, many of the comforts of home (hence your handle, as you've mentioned). You've found a spot that has a high probability of producing elk. You hike into the woods 4 miles or so and wait, and as the elk feel pressure from the other hunters they move through this area and you're in business. Carve it up, put it on the horse, and head back out to the base camp. In practice that's not terribly different from what some deer hunter do. He finds a spot that produces deer, sets up, and waits. Others spot and stalk, as do many elk, antelope, and moose hunters. We all like to feel good about ourselves, but is what I described really a growth in skill levels, a "higher class" than deer hunting. Reading some of the deer hunting stories I'd say there are those who put far more into their hunt than that.

You're certainly a more experienced and knowledgable hunter than myself. But knowing were you set up there'd be little preventing me from duplicating your success. I won't, don't worry! Again, what I'm debating here is not your skill level and well deserved success in your endeavors, but the concept that a bigger game animal makes for a higher level of hunter. On this forum many choose the largest animal, on the deer hunting forum however most pledged their alligience to their beloved whitetail. Those that did comment on the point I raised seemed to support it, far more eloquently than I made mine.

I do think the bow hunters have let us off easy. From their vantage point having rifle hunters talk about levels or classes of hunter must sound hilarious. A while back someone mentioned that they learned more in their first season of bow hunting than in the previous decade of rifle hunting.

RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

Cal,

Let me put it this way, the more big game species you take -- under varying conditions, in varying climates and topographies -- the more experienced and more accomplished you become. The tougher and meaner the game and the environment becomes the more your personal safety is put at risk and the more you will have to have critical control over your mental faculties at the moment of truth that may not have been so challenged in your past experience. This sounds like a progression to me, though some seem to not like to think so.

You are right about at least one thing.... the bowhunters have let us off easy! The killing part of a hunt when using a scoped rifle matched to the game at hand is practically a given (EXCEPT when your game starts getting big, big, bigger and lots, lots meaner).

Note my response to ElkCrazy8 who plans to take a brownie with a bow....

[experience... accomplishment... growth... change... ]
----------------------------------

Andy,

Just because there is some one (like a PH) to lead a hunter to where the game MAY be on a given day does NOT necessarily guarantee that the hunter is up to the challenge of following and keeping up. Many a guide or PH has lamented that the hunter did NOT level with him regarding his abilities. More than once (understatement) the hunter was not up to the required effort for the given specie to be hunted when all he had to do was "walk behind" the PH. This is true ESPECIALLY if the hunter is outside of his "home" enviornment and is in a foreign situation. Seems simple, but is overlooked/underestimated by many right along with the mental toughness required for the completing the undertaking at hand.

Good Luck and Good Hunting,
EKM

RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

I have hunted moose in Alaska and elk in Oregan and Colorado. The Moose hunt was a lot of fun and I took a nice bull. But for the excitment you just can't beat Elk hunting. I have hunted elk for the past 20 seasons with a bow, just the thought of hearing a bull answer my call gets me excited.

HANDS DOWN ELK>>>>>>>>>>>&gt ;ELK>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>ELK

RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

Excellent! Now I just need you to agree to the main point: The quality/skill/class level of the hunter is defined by the hunter him/herself, not by the size, speed, or scarcity of their quary. :D In logic this would be the post hoc fallacy. A before B, therefore A caused B. You may be moving up in game but your improvement as a hunter isn't cause and effect, you're growing in skill becuase you have the capacity to learn and grow from those experiences.

RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

Hunting may be forever altered here today.
A=B, B=C, therefore A=C. Put your tag on it and lets go home.

Some sort of magic "gotcha"? I don't think so.

This allows for mere self proclamation and self delusion, a rodent hunter could exit from a bar and declare to the world, "I am the greatest hunter that ever was". A neutral third party would likely conclude, (1) "this guy is a legend in his own mind" or (2) "show me/tell me some sort of evidence to support your claim." .....

"You are right, a 350 yard shot on a woodchuck is one hell of a shot, you're pretty good, maybe the best woodchuck shooter in the county.... but based on that alone, I'm afraid you are a little bit short on making your claim for "best hunter in the world".

IMHO, the quality/skill/class level of the hunter is defined by the what the hunter has accomplished and his ability to carry that experience forward and apply it.

Now some hunters "plateau" and stop growing inspite of their great talent and potential. They could have been and done this and that, but..... Many are indeed and continue to be "masters of their particular realm" that they conquered when they were 17 and they choose to stay right there, and that is fine. I'm glad to give them their due so long as the topic of discussion lies within their realm. NOW, when they start claiming this and claiming that and they are talking OUTSIDE of their now plateaued experience, then sorry ---- steep discounts now apply.

Good Luck and Good Hunting,
EKM

RE: Poll: Which Would You Choose?
 

Trophy bull elk!