# What is fair chase?



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

The debate on the now dead spidey bull has brought this topic to light. The different set of ethics that each hunter follows while in the field will always make this topic heated and debatable. No one answer will probably ever be correct...however, I do think that the creed with which we base our ethic of fair chase should be examined as outlined in the following article:
http://fwp.mt.gov/news/article_2557.aspx

I especially like the last paragraph: "For the modern sport hunter with all the advantages of modern technology at his or her disposal, a fair chase ethic imposes a voluntary limitation on the means the hunter may employ to achieve an end. Fair chase is not about the fairness of the kill (the end) but about the fairness of the chase (the means). In fair chase hunting, not only do the means justify the end , but the means are the end: the chase is the hunt. And a fair chase hunter earns the privilege to take an animal's life by mastering the skills of the hunt."


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> The debate on the now dead spidey bull has brought this topic to light. The different set of ethics that each hunter follows while in the field will always make this topic heated and debatable. No one answer will probably ever be correct...however, I do think that the creed with which we base our ethic of fair chase should be examined as outlined in the following article:
> http://fwp.mt.gov/news/article_2557.aspx
> 
> I especially like the last paragraph: "For the modern sport hunter with all the advantages of modern technology at his or her disposal, a fair chase ethic imposes a voluntary limitation on the means the hunter may employ to achieve an end. Fair chase is not about the fairness of the kill (the end) but about the fairness of the chase (the means). *In fair chase hunting, not only do the means justify the end , but the means are the end: the chase is the hunt. And a fair chase hunter earns the privilege to take an animal's life by mastering the skills of the hunt.*"


I can agree to that 'standard' of 'Fair Chase'. I also contend that Denny followed this 'standard' during his hunt.

I use the guidelines of the B&C and P&Y to define "Fair Chase", and B&C WILL allow this animal to be entered into their records as the new *WORLD RECORD* taken under "Fair Chase" conditions. :idea:


----------



## Renegade (Sep 11, 2007)

Any animal that can get away is being fairly chased.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Renegade said:


> Any animal that can get away is being fairly chased.


Based on this definition Spidey was taken under 'Fair Chase' conditions. -Ov-


----------



## Igottabigone (Oct 4, 2007)

What is the difference from the way Spidey was taken and a "high fence" hunt. Everyone condemns high fence hunting yet with the unit boudaries I see no difference.


----------



## Riverlution (Sep 23, 2008)

what do you mean by unit bouindaries? as far as I know the unit boundaries are only for the humans not the animals.


----------



## Nor-tah (Dec 16, 2007)

Igottabigone said:


> What is the difference from the way Spidey was taken and a "high fence" hunt. Everyone condemns high fence hunting yet with the unit boudaries I see no difference.


huh? So this bull could not go outside the monroe boundries? What was stopping him?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I can agree to that 'standard' of 'Fair Chase'. I also contend that Denny followed this 'standard' during his hunt.
> 
> I use the guidelines of the B&C and P&Y to define "Fair Chase", and B&C WILL allow this animal to be entered into their records as the new *WORLD RECORD* taken under "Fair Chase" conditions. :idea:


I am not going to go the rounds with you on this one...obviously, I disagree. But, for argument's sake, if you look at the Boone and Crocket Club's definition of "Fair Chase", you will see...

"FAIR CHASE, as defined by the Boone and Crockett Club, is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals.
HUNTER ETHICS
Fundamental to all hunting is the concept of conservation of natural resources. Hunting in today's world involves the regulated harvest of individual animals in a manner that conserves, protects, and perpetuates the hunted population. *The hunter engages in a one-to-one relationship with the quarry *and his or her hunting should be guided by a hierarchy of ethics related to hunting, which includes the following tenets:
1. Obey all applicable laws and regulations.
2. Respect the customs of the locale where the hunting occurs.
3. Exercise a personal code of behavior that reflects favorably on your abilities and sensibilities as a hunter.
4. Attain and maintain the skills necessary to make the kill as certain and quick as possible.
5. Behave in a way that will bring no dishonor to either the hunter, the hunted, or the environment.
6. Recognize that these tenets are intended to enhance the hunter's experience of the relationship between predator and prey, which is one of the most fundamental relationships of humans and their environment."

My questioning of Denny is simple: why does he need the help/assistance of Mossback?


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Great post WY2UT...It will be clear that they abided by these guidelines when it is officially entered in the B&C books. That should clear up any and all controversy!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> My questioning of Denny is simple: why does he need the help/assistance of Mossback?


I would ask, why not use EVERY *legal* option available to enhance the hunt/experience? Denny and Doyle are very good personal friends. Why do you 'need' to have your family/friends help/assist you on ANY of your hunts.fishing trips? :roll:


----------



## Igottabigone (Oct 4, 2007)

The bull could have gone outside of the Monroe boundaries, but it didn't and the likelihood of it happening was minimal. Granted, animals in a "high fence" area cannot go beyond said fence. However, many outiftters own property where they do not put fences up. But, people jump down people's throat for going on a "ranch hunt" or "high fence hunt" or "canned hunt" etc. IMO there is no difference from buying a tag to hunt a designated area and paying thousands of dollars to hunt one particular animal. So what is the difference. I am not saying anything is wrong with it, but anytime I see a pic of animal taken on a "ranch" everyone seems to dismiss it as a "canned hunt." I realize some are better than others but are they all not considered a "canned hunt" including the Spidey hunt.


----------



## itchytriggerfinger (Sep 12, 2007)

I have a brother in law that has scouted an area for a while and has seen some decent animals. according to what is being presented here, if i were to go up and harvest an animal,even though he has been scouting this area and told me where to go, if i shoot a record book animal. Then i can't enter him into the books. I mean it wasn't one to one. My brother in law scouted i hunted and the animal died. so two to one. Thats not fair chaise???!!!???!!!. 
It seams to me that there is a big grey area about this. Until laws say otherwise. isn't it fair chase regardless??? as long as its not tied up or inside a ten foot fence???
Is road hunting fair chase??? hummmm another question. Some say yes and some no.


----------



## Renegade (Sep 11, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Renegade said:
> 
> 
> > Any animal that can get away is being fairly chased.
> ...


Sure sounds like it to me.


----------



## sawsman (Sep 13, 2007)

gee whiz.. will this discussion ever end. I think most are just jealous that they didn't kill spidey.

Man that's going to look good on Denny's wall!

sawsman


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

What about tree stands, scopes, bino's, spotting scopes, radio's, computer aided sight tapes, scent lock, horses, four wheelers, trucks, stoves, camping equipment, google earth, back pack systems, warm clothing, in-line muzzys, magnum ammunition, range finders, 'angled' range finders, double bull blinds, and mostly, the EPEK X-C3 etc... Don't all of these technologies give us some sort of advantage over our quary?


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

EPEK is right. All of that gives us an advantage. And actually, I am dang grateful for it all. I know first hand that in one on one combat against a deer, I'd get the crap kicked out of me! They are much stronger than they look! So advantages? Heck yes. EPEK - any way I could put that X-C3 in a 30-06?


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

EPEK said:


> What about tree stands, scopes, bino's, spotting scopes, radio's, computer aided sight tapes, scent lock, horses, four wheelers, trucks, stoves, camping equipment, google earth, back pack systems, warm clothing, in-line muzzys, magnum ammunition, range finders, 'angled' range finders, double bull blinds, and mostly, the EPEK X-C3 etc... Don't all of these technologies give us some sort of advantage over our quary?


+1


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

EPEK said:


> What about tree stands, scopes, bino's, spotting scopes, radio's, computer aided sight tapes, scent lock, horses, four wheelers, trucks, stoves, camping equipment, google earth, back pack systems, warm clothing, in-line muzzys, magnum ammunition, range finders, 'angled' range finders, double bull blinds, and mostly, the EPEK X-C3 etc... Don't all of these technologies give us some sort of advantage over our quary?


Wasn't that pretty much the scope of the original post of this thread?

At what point do we, as hunters, decide that our technological advances have provided us with an unfair advantages over our quary?

From the linked article out of Montana:

"Jim Posewitz, a leading authority on hunting ethics and author of the book Beyond Fair Chase , describes fair chase as "a balance that allows hunters to occasionally succeed while animals generally avoid being taken."

"Simply put, a chase is fair if the animal has a reasonable chance of escaping the pursuit unharmed. If the animal has little or no chance, the chase is not fair."

A question that raised in my mind considering Spidey is: did this animal have any chance at all of escaping the pursuit unharmed? Think about that. For how many months has Mossback's crew been pursuing this animal? Did it honestly have a chance at escaping unharmed? $175K sure can change a person's perspective of what fair chase might mean.

I think W2U said it very well in the beginning -- that no one answer will ever be correct.

Someone else mentioned jealousy. **** straight I'm jealous. I'm jealous that I don't have $175K to throw at a crew of guides to go find me a trophy animal, then lead me to it, allow me to shoot it, then take care of the rest for me. Yep. I'm jealous.

Great bull. I hope it breaks the World Record. Unfortunately, there is just to much emphasis anymore on world records. Fair chase? I think hunting in Utah has gone beyond my interpretation of "fair chase".


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> "Jim Posewitz, a leading authority on hunting ethics
> 
> Someone else mentioned jealousy. **** straight I'm jealous. I'm jealous that I don't have $175K to throw at a crew of guides to go find me a trophy animal, then lead me to it, allow me to shoot it, then take care of the rest for me. Yep. I'm jealous.
> 
> Great bull. I hope it breaks the World Record. Unfortunately, there is just to much emphasis anymore on world records. Fair chase? I think hunting in Utah has gone beyond my interpretation of "fair chase".


You and your brother crack me up.

1)What does it take to be "a leading authority" on hunting ethics, and what 'panel' gives such 'authority?

2)Is Mr. Posewitz more of an "authority" on hunting ethics than two groups that are recognized by the MAJORITY of the hunting community as "leading authorities" on hunting ethics, Boone & Crockett and Pope & Young? If so, why/how? If not, since this bull WILL be recognized as the new World Record and deemed to have been harvested under "Fair Chase" by THE leading "authority" on hunting ethics, what basis do you have for saying it wasn't?

3)You and others keep implying the hunter "was led to it, allowed to shoot it", yet you have not ONE OUNCE of proof/fact to support such a claim/assertion! I dare say the hunter spent more days/hours in the field, and covered more country hunting for this animal than you will on ALL of your hunts combined this fall. You were half way honest when you said you are jealous that you don't have $175k to spend on hunting, the rest was pure BS!


----------



## Igottabigone (Oct 4, 2007)

What about driving to a different state to pick the hunter up because he doesn't want to drive to Utah? What about a hunter saying call me when you find a 370+ bull and I will fly in the next day? These are only two of the many happenings that I KNOW of.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Igottabigone said:


> What about driving to a different state to pick the hunter up because he doesn't want to drive to Utah? What about a hunter saying call me when you find a 370+ bull and I will fly in the next day? These are only two of the many happenings that I KNOW of.


Where's the PROOF? :roll:

To be more clear, the hunter who killed this bull that WILL be the new World Record spent MORE time in the hills than Igotabigone will spend the entire fall hunting.


----------



## weatherby25 (Sep 10, 2007)

> You and others keep implying the hunter "was led to it, allowed to shoot it", yet you have not ONE OUNCE of proof/fact to support such a claim/assertion! I dare say the hunter spent more days/hours in the field, and covered more country hunting for this animal than you will on ALL of your hunts combined this fall


Hold up there Pro. That is a very bold thing to say. It is all so something that you do not know. Your asking for proof of them so you do the same. Proof he has been in the field more then others. Proof he was not "led" to the bull. Proof he put the time and effort in. SO on and so on. The fact is he PAID for a guide to do the work for him. Nothing wrong with that. That is why Mossback is there. Not saying he did not work, but to say he put more time in then others is not right.


----------



## Igottabigone (Oct 4, 2007)

Well considering my closest friend is a guide for the "crew" and experienced it himself, I consider that pretty darn reliable. In fact Pro, I bet you know him. Also, for you to deny that stuff like that happens is laughable. If, in fact, you do spend the amount of time you suggest around the Mossback crew then you should know that this type of practice is quite common. I am not saying it is wrong. That is why these hunters hire guides so they can have the luxury of killing trophy animals without putting in the time themselves.


----------



## weatherby25 (Sep 10, 2007)

> To be more clear, the hunter who killed this bull that WILL be the new World Record spent MORE time in the hills than Igotabigone will spend the entire fall hunting.


I know you like your PROOF. Becuse you like your PROOF so much where is your PROOF. Sorry while I do not agree with what they are saying here any more then you does not mean that they have not put the time/effort in. In fact that could be the very reason they are upset. People get upset when they feel they work harder then some one else and get less in return.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

weatherby25 said:


> > You and others keep implying the hunter "was led to it, allowed to shoot it", yet you have not ONE OUNCE of proof/fact to support such a claim/assertion! I dare say the hunter spent more days/hours in the field, and covered more country hunting for this animal than you will on ALL of your hunts combined this fall
> 
> 
> Hold up there Pro. That is a very bold thing to say. It is all so something that you do not know. Your asking for proof of them so you do the same. Proof he has been in the field more then others. Proof he was not "led" to the bull. Proof he put the time and effort in. SO on and so on. The fact is he PAID for a guide to do the work for him. Nothing wrong with that. That is why Mossback is there. Not saying he did not work, but to say he put more time in then others is not right.


He put 30+ days in scouting/hunting this bull. If, and that is a big IF, the person who said he just showed up and shot the bull can show he hunted more than that I will take it back. I dare say most on this site will put that many days in the hills total, let alone spend that many days hunting one specific animal. So, what I said is "right", until proven otherwise. I figure if all the 'experts' that weren't there for this hunt 'know' how this hunt went down, I 'know' how many days they spend hunting each fall. :? 'Fair' is 'fair' _right_? :wink:


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> weatherby25 said:
> 
> 
> > > You and others keep implying the hunter "was led to it, allowed to shoot it", yet you have not ONE OUNCE of proof/fact to support such a claim/assertion! I dare say the hunter spent more days/hours in the field, and covered more country hunting for this animal than you will on ALL of your hunts combined this fall
> ...


I don't believe you, you have no proof.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> You and your brother crack me up.
> 
> 1)What does it take to be "a leading authority" on hunting ethics, and what 'panel' gives such 'authority?


I didn't call him an authority (Mr. Posewitz). The article from Mt.gov did.


proutdoors said:


> 2)Is Mr. Posewitz more of an "authority" on hunting ethics than two groups that are recognized by the MAJORITY of the hunting community as "leading authorities" on hunting ethics, Boone & Crockett and Pope & Young?


hehehe. you crack me up. To answer your question, Mr. Posewitz is the founder of Orion - The Hunter's Institute, which is the premier hunter ethics organiztion in North America. If there is any hunters ethic "authority", Jim is it. No one from the Boone and Crockett organization would ever try to argue that.



proutdoors said:


> 3)You and others keep implying the hunter "was led to it, allowed to shoot it", yet you have not ONE OUNCE of proof/fact to support such a claim/assertion! I dare say the hunter spent more days/hours in the field, and covered more country hunting for this animal than you will on ALL of your hunts combined this fall. You were half way honest when you said you are jealous that you don't have $175k to spend on hunting, the rest was pure BS!


Pro -- you prove to me that he spent more time afield. You prove to me he wasn't led to it. You prove to me that he covered more country. Pure BS.

FWIW -- I'm happy for the person who got this great bull. I don't agree with the means that he used to get this bull. It is not the way I would have gone about it. That doesn't mean that others can't feel otherwise.

I heard rumor that Doyle's crew got a trespass fine while on the Monroe unit -- any validity to this rumor?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> 1)What does it take to be "a leading authority" on hunting ethics, and what 'panel' gives such 'authority?
> 
> 2)Is Mr. Posewitz more of an "authority" on hunting ethics than two groups that are recognized by the MAJORITY of the hunting community as "leading authorities" on hunting ethics, Boone & Crockett and Pope & Young? If so, why/how? If not, since this bull WILL be recognized as the new World Record and deemed to have been harvested under "Fair Chase" by THE leading "authority" on hunting ethics, what basis do you have for saying it wasn't?
> 
> 3)You and others keep implying the hunter "was led to it, allowed to shoot it", yet you have not ONE OUNCE of proof/fact to support such a claim/assertion! I dare say the hunter spent more days/hours in the field, and covered more country hunting for this animal than you will on ALL of your hunts combined this fall. You were half way honest when you said you are jealous that you don't have $175k to spend on hunting, the rest was pure BS!


1) what makes him an authority...well, maybe a lifetime of work. Obviously, you are in no way familiar with him or his work. But, even the B&C club recognizes him and his work. Maybe you should do a little work and find out exactly what he has done...
http://www.backcountryhunters.org/index ... k=posewitz

2) The basis I have for saying it wasn't is simple...I don't believe the animal had any real chance of escaping. Considering the fact that numerous "squatters", spotters, scouters--whatever you want to call them--have been on this animal for months...I believe the fair chase code has been exceeded without doubt. Also, I am really sure that the Boone and Crockett tenet that the "hunter engages in a one-to-one relationship with the quarry..."

3) IT doesn't matter how much time I spent on my hunts this fall...that is not at issue. What is at issue is whether this man would have/could have shot this animal without the dollars he spent on the guide service he paid for and whether or not this man was in the field the entire time it was being scouted, spotted, and squatted upon by Mossback. The truth is, and you know it, that he was not. In fact, when the man first missed the bull at 190 yards he totally left the field and his mossback crew on the mountain.

The problem I have with what has been done is twofold: 1) the state of Utah has auctioned off a tag to the highest bidder. Instead of opening this tag up to the public domain on a fair and equal opportunity basis, Utah has created a special tag or special tags for the rich. This is 100% wrong 2) Instead of helping someone spot, hunt, and chase an animal fairly, Mossback has gone beyond the ethical scope of guiding and done more than their share of the work for their hunters.

The sad thing, to me, is that the very organization that Teddy Roosevelt created--the Boone and Crockett Club--is the very organization that is turning a blind eye on the conservation ethics established by him. Afterall, wasn't it Teddy that said, "The professional market hunter who kills game for the hide or for the feathers or for the meat or to sell antlers and other trophies; market men who put game in cold storage; and the rich people, who are content to buy what they have not the skill to get by their own exertions - these are the men who are the real enemies of game."


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> Pro -- you prove to me that he spent more time afield. You prove to me he wasn't led to it. You prove to me that he covered more country. Pure BS.
> 
> FWIW -- I'm happy for the person who got this great bull. I don't agree with the means that he used to get this bull. It is not the way I would have gone about it. That doesn't mean that others can't feel otherwise.
> 
> I heard rumor that Doyle's crew got a trespass fine while on the Monroe unit -- any validity to this rumor?


1)I have as much proof that he did as you and the other pinheads have that he didn't. _(O)_ BS indeed!

2)You know what they say about rumors and those that repeat them don't you? I call those kind of people magpies. But, the answer is NO there is no validity to the rumor. I think it would be ethical to verify such nonsense before spreading the BS so freely.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

What is truely great about all of this is what these haters have to say means nothing! This great hunter, had a great experience and shot a great bull. Legally and ethically! At the very same time putting in more money back to our DWR for one great bull than most will give back in a lifetime. Isn't that awesome. So argue your pointless rants...because at the end of the day it DOESN"T MATTER. :wink:


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Why do you people even care? You're like a bunch of women talking about other peoples business and how they do their lives.

I like to drink a lot of whisky, sleep with strange women and pay someone to mow my lawn. Take shots at me for awhile.

Good god!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> The problem I have with what has been done is twofold: 1) the state of Utah has auctioned off a tag to the highest bidder. Instead of opening this tag up to the public domain on a fair and equal opportunity basis, Utah has created a special tag or special tags for the rich. This is 100% wrong 2) Instead of helping someone spot, hunt, and chase an animal fairly, Mossback has gone beyond the ethical scope of guiding and done more than their share of the work for their hunters.


1)They raise a pile of money with this program, and they also give the SAME tag to the public through a random drawing. Also, you/I can buy the Governors tag just as Denny did if you/I so chose to do so. That means it is available to the public on "a fair and equal opportunity basis".

2)Please explain. :?


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

Treehugnhuntr said:


> Why do you people even care? You're like a bunch of women talking about other peoples business and how they do their lives.
> 
> I like to drink a lot of whisky, sleep with strange women and pay someone to mow my lawn. Take shots at me for awhile.
> 
> Good god!


What a POS...how can you call your self a REAL homeowner when you "Peay" to have your lawn mowed???? I don't even know you!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> 1)They raise a pile of money with this program, and they also give the SAME tag to the public through a random drawing. Also, you/I can buy the Governors tag just as Denny did if you/I so chose to do so. That means it is available to the public on "a fair and equal opportunity basis".
> 
> 2)Please explain. :?


1) come on Pro...you surely aren't this naive. They, the DWR, could have raised just as much money had they sold a grundle of general season tags to the blue collar folk of Utah. Your conservation reasoning is pure BS, in my opinion. Ask yourself how many tags did the general public have to give up before the state of Utah could grow elk to that size...

Also, you and I could not (well, at least me...) buy that Governor's tag because it is not within our means...it is only available to those who have the means--the rich people. This is also why Mr. Austad has had numerous chances to hunt LE elk and deer in Utah.

2) No explaining necessary...would he have killed the bull without Mossback? IF so, why waste the money?


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

I'm not here to debate the taking of the Spider Bull, time will tell. However, I do believe the issue of fair chase is valid. Many of the guidleines were written many years ago. Is it time they are revisited? Equipment will be hard to define as technology has reached new levels, but it definetly needs to be addressed. Do synthetic underwear enahance a hunters ability as much as radios and rangefinders? For me yes, I use underwear my grandfather could only dream of, I gave up on the radio thing just wasn't natural IMO for hunting, never owned a rangefinder, but the underwear has made me more comfortable therefore enhancing my chances. Money and guiding have changed hunting. the outfitting business, it definetly is not what it was. Is it time to revisit outfitting in relationship to fair chase? I believe so. Hiring an outfitter and guide to assist in the hunt is one thing, hiring a crew to insure success and provide a shot is not fair chase. I surely don't believe that bounty hunting meets requirements of fair chase. If a man offers a reward for an animal I believe that crosses the boundaries of fair chase. Tips used to be a reward for hardwork, now it seems like tips are offered up front as an incentive. 
Bottom Line is I doubt any of the hunters from the 50's and 60's that defined fair chase would accept many of the practices used today. Although I believe those who have masterd skills of woodsmanship will still be consistently succesful on a "one to one" basis, todays hunting world has allowed the record books to be rewritten by many who would not dare to venture on a solo hunt, let a lone take an animal.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

It sounds like W2U and *P*eanut *B*utter and *H*am (thats a deadly combo) needs to get a life and quit trashing on someone who shot a monster bull. You two pinheads weren't there the entire hunt. You didn't even see him shoot the bull so bite your tongue until you actually have video footage that it wasnt a fair chase hunt.

Does Denny need to come on here and put you two in your place? Of course not. He doesnt have time for PINHEADS!!


----------



## Flyfishn247 (Oct 2, 2007)

You want to talk about *fair chase *and *unfair advatages*, how about a rifle elk hunt smack dab in the middle of the *rut*. My opinion would be any animal taken during the rut with the most effective weapon out there should *not* be allowed in the books. Talk about a *FARM* hunt, might as well be.


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

wyoming2utah said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > 1)They raise a pile of money with this program, and they also give the SAME tag to the public through a random drawing. Also, you/I can buy the Governors tag just as Denny did if you/I so chose to do so. That means it is available to the public on "a fair and equal opportunity basis".
> ...


Ever been hunting the general elk season in Utah?
It's standing room only, we have NOT given up any tags to grow big bulls, we simply manage the age class taken, simple as that.


----------



## bwhntr (Sep 12, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > 1)They raise a pile of money with this program, and they also give the SAME tag to the public through a random drawing. Also, you/I can buy the Governors tag just as Denny did if you/I so chose to do so. That means it is available to the public on "a fair and equal opportunity basis".
> ...


 :roll:


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

mulepacker said:


> I'm not here to debate the taking of the Spider Bull, time will tell. However, I do believe the issue of fair chase is valid. Many of the guidleines were written many years ago. Is it time they are revisited? Equipment will be hard to define as technology has reached new levels, but it definetly needs to be addressed. Do synthetic underwear enahance a hunters ability as much as radios and rangefinders? For me yes, I use underwear my grandfather could only dream of, I gave up on the radio thing just wasn't natural IMO for hunting, never owned a rangefinder, but the underwear has made me more comfortable therefore enhancing my chances. Money and guiding have changed hunting. the outfitting business, it definetly is not what it was. Is it time to revisit outfitting in relationship to fair chase? I believe so. Hiring an outfitter and guide to assist in the hunt is one thing, hiring a crew to insure success and provide a shot is not fair chase. I surely don't believe that bounty hunting meets requirements of fair chase. If a man offers a reward for an animal I believe that crosses the boundaries of fair chase. Tips used to be a reward for hardwork, now it seems like tips are offered up front as an incentive.
> Bottom Line is I doubt any of the hunters from the 50's and 60's that defined fair chase would accept many of the practices used today. Although I believe those who have masterd skills of woodsmanship will still be consistently succesful on a "one to one" basis, todays hunting world has allowed the record books to be rewritten by many who would not dare to venture on a solo hunt, let a lone take an animal.


+1, 2, and 3!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> 1) come on Pro...you surely aren't this naive. They, the DWR, could have raised just as much money had they sold a grundle of general season tags to the blue collar folk of Utah. Your conservation reasoning is pure BS, in my opinion. Ask yourself how many tags did the general public have to give up before the state of Utah could grow elk to that size...
> 
> Also, you and I could not (well, at least me...) buy that Governor's tag because it is not within our means...it is only available to those who have the means--the rich people. This is also why Mr. Austad has had numerous chances to hunt LE elk and deer in Utah.
> 
> 2) No explaining necessary...would he have killed the bull without Mossback? IF so, why waste the money?


1)Who is naive? I would much rather have ONE tag bring in $100k+ than have it passed on to the hunter who is struggling day to day.

You have had the opportunity to acquire wealth just as Denny did, but YOU chose not to, so it was YOUR choice to not have the money to buy such a tag. He didn't steal his wealth, he EARNED it and now he gets to enjoy it.

2)I doubt he feels he "wasted" his money. People with money often don't value money, they value the things money can bring them such as great hunting tags, time to spend w/family and friends instead of working 40+ hours a week for the 'man', living the 'easy' life. People like Denny value time more than money, so they gladly exchange PAPER for time, opportunity. If you value money more than time you can't relate. No need to answer, your previous posts have made it clear where you stand.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> It sounds like W2U and *P*eanut *B*utter and *H*am (thats a deadly combo) needs to get a life and quit trashing on someone who shot a monster bull.





PBH said:


> FWIW -- I'm happy for the person who got this great bull. I don't agree with the means that he used to get this bull. It is not the way I would have gone about it. That doesn't mean that others can't feel otherwise.


I'm confused. I don't recall trashing anyone that shot a monster bull. did I do that somewhere?



PBH said:


> I heard rumor that Doyle's crew got a trespass fine while on the Monroe unit -- any validity to this rumor?





proutdoors said:


> I think it would be ethical to verify such nonsense before spreading the BS so freely.


Isn't that what I just did? I asked for verification of such prior to spreading any such nonsense.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Pro -- Coyote - others. forget the PBH W2U vs. Pro and Coyote for a few minutes.

Go back and read Mulepackers post again. I want your thoughts concerning his post. forget about Doyle and forget about the Spider Bull. Those are irrelevant. Read his post, and give me your thoughts.

PBH -- ham on rye.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> I'm confused. I don't recall trashing anyone that shot a monster bull. did I do that somewhere?


That comment was for your lame Brother. He bashed Mossback for the record bull they killed the on Pahvant. He said Mossback chased off his family members. Now hes saying this bull wasn't a fair chase hunt.

Same ole Wyo2ut.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

*VIVA DOYAL MOSS!!! VIVA!!!*

I wish I was Doyal Moss... 

Great bull, great state, great grandpa, great steak, great golly miss molly...


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

mulepacker said:


> I'm not here to debate the taking of the Spider Bull, time will tell. However, I do believe the issue of fair chase is valid. Many of the guidleines were written many years ago. Is it time they are revisited? Equipment will be hard to define as technology has reached new levels, but it definetly needs to be addressed. Do synthetic underwear enahance a hunters ability as much as radios and rangefinders? For me yes, I use underwear my grandfather could only dream of, I gave up on the radio thing just wasn't natural IMO for hunting, never owned a rangefinder, but the underwear has made me more comfortable therefore enhancing my chances. Money and guiding have changed hunting. the outfitting business, it definetly is not what it was. Is it time to revisit outfitting in relationship to fair chase? I believe so. Hiring an outfitter and guide to assist in the hunt is one thing, hiring a crew to insure success and provide a shot is not fair chase. I surely don't believe that bounty hunting meets requirements of fair chase. If a man offers a reward for an animal I believe that crosses the boundaries of fair chase. Tips used to be a reward for hardwork, now it seems like tips are offered up front as an incentive.
> Bottom Line is I doubt any of the hunters from the 50's and 60's that defined fair chase would accept many of the practices used today. Although I believe those who have masterd skills of woodsmanship will still be consistently succesful on a "one to one" basis, todays hunting world has allowed the record books to be rewritten by many who would not dare to venture on a solo hunt, let a lone take an animal.


Travis, you have no say in the matter because you haven't posted pictures of your bull. :wink:


----------



## Igottabigone (Oct 4, 2007)

Pro,
Has Mossback ever had a hunter tell him to call him when they have the bull spotted and he would fly in the next day?


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

I got a record too, it's all mine, and like they say, "it's not how you got there, it's what you got when you get there"
Love you guys,
Berry


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> That comment was for your lame Brother. He bashed Mossback for the record bull they killed two years ago on Pahvant. He said Mossback chased off his family members. Now hes saying this bull wasn't a fair chase hunt.
> 
> Same ole Wyo2ut.


Same ol coyote. Can't do anything 'cept name call. I don't like Mossback either, for the record. But, I thought you said you were upset because of the "trashing" of a hunter? Which is it?

How about an intelligent response to Mulepacker's post? Is that possible of you? Or, is it simply easier to pull the name-calling card? i think you have some intelligence in there, it's just a matter of pulling it out of you...


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

I shot a spike bull with a recurve bow and a wood arrow... 8)


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

He!! I can barely post a comment on this forum let alone pictures. I would be happy to 
e-mail you pictures or if a few of the guys on this forum who know how to post pictures and I have e-mailed them to want to go ahead. I have posted a story and pictures on MM if you are interested, not that I prefer MM only that I am able to figure it out over there.

Sorry to get off subject.
It is just my competency is much more on the level of a mule rather than a computer.

.


----------



## weatherby25 (Sep 10, 2007)

> if a few of the guys on this forum who know how to post pictures and I have e-mailed them to want to go ahead. I


I would post them for you, but I can not use photobucket at work and that is the only way I know how.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Shoot it to me, I'll do it.


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

send me an e-mail address


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Igottabigone said:


> Pro,
> Has Mossback ever had a hunter tell him to call him when they have the bull spotted and he would fly in the next day?


Not that I am aware of.

PBH, I am NOT concerned about what guiding services are doing to the hunting world. In fact, I am MORE worried about certain hunters thinking their way is the only 'ethical' way, and those who hunt differently are going to lead to the demise of hunting. I have a ton of respect for mulepacker, and he knows that. Having said that, his view on this subject is different than mine.

FWIW, I have a different style guiding than the "Mossback way", so I have gone back to doing my own outfitting. I consider Doyle a very good friend, and someone I consider 'good' for hunting. He is one of the best business men I know, and I know several million/billionaires. I see it happen in all types of segments of society where those who are BETTER at what they do than the rest they are attacked/hated, that is a FACT. I also see that those doing most of the attacking/hating are people who fall FAR short of being on the same level of skill as those who get it done. Not ONE hunter has lost opportunity or the ability to hunt because of the MONSTER animals Mossback puts on the ground year after year! Not ONE! So where does all this fear and doom and gloom come from? 100% jealousy!


----------



## Igottabigone (Oct 4, 2007)

> Not that I am aware of.


WOW Pro!!!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I also see that those doing most of the attacking/hating are people who fall FAR short of being on the same level of skill as those who get it done.
> Not ONE hunter has lost opportunity or the ability to hunt because of the MONSTER animals Mossback puts on the ground year after year! Not ONE!
> So where does all this fear and doom and gloom come from? 100% jealousy!


1) are you sure...how can you say that. Have you ever hunted with these people? Do you know what their skill level is? What about Mr. Austad...is he also a grand hunter? If so, why did he hire Mossback?

2) Maybe not directly...but probably indirectly. I would be willing to bet that Moss supports conservation tags, LE hunting, and premium LE units...which all have led to a loss of general season opportunity...and in Moss's case an increase in money.

3) I am not so jealous of Moss...I am more jealous of the rich guy who can afford to buy a tag. I like what Jim Posewitz--who your vaunted Pope and Young club quotes--said, "One only has to browse the advertisements in any of the contemporary sporting magazines to find a vigorous market in the sale of hunting experiences. The products come in a variety of shapes and sizes....What almost all of them have in common is the exclusion of the hunter who is not a man of means. The more common these practices of exclusion become; the more fragile our hunter based conservation heritage becomes; the more difficult recruitment and retention become; and, the more closely we are drawn to the old aristocratic notions of the king's deer. In this case, the dollar is the new king...
...The peril in some of the contemporary forms of commercial hunting is not in that they seek compensation for landowner needs or for services provided. The peril is its own belief that it must exclude every rank and file hunter or aspiring hunter unable or unwilling to pay the toll."


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

You know in the past 5 years many did not worry about Liars Loans, Inflated market Values, in fact many did not worry of many of the tactics used in the real estate industry. Today it has caused more strife and concern for the public welfare than any occurence in 50 years. Now I do not mean to equate our economy with the current state of Utah hunting I realize the scale is much greater. However I hope that it gets folks to thinking that yes we do need to watch and critique our intersets. There does need to be a defined set of values, ethics and standards, besides the regulations I believe this is the purpose a fair chase philosophy. I also think that in the past few years technology and trophy hunting have became an issue that needs to be addressed as to what is acceptable to the hunting fraternity. It would be unfortunate that a vocal minority caused the demise of hunting as we or our grandfathers knew it.
I also respect PRO, however he is right we don't see things the same. Although I think that we would be on the same team if push came to shove. Therefore I hope he contemplates my view, I know I have thought about his. With that in mind, until there is any proof I would suggest we all accept that the Spider bull is dead. He has been taken legally by a gentlelman and a group of associates that have proven very successful in killing trophy elk. Is obviously something they are proud of and something few have equaled. When accepted as the new world record it will be confirmed that he met todays definition of fair chase. Not mine, Not Por's, Not Mossback's, Not Mr. Austad's but a credible organization of the hunting fraternity. That alone provides validity whether as individuals we agree or not.

Now back to my thought, as a fraternity is it time to revisit fair chase? I believe so before our market crashes.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Pro -- do you believe that it is time to look at "fair chase" and update it's definition? Is hunting still within the realm of "fair chase", as defined by the Boone and Crockett club to be "in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the game animals.”

If so, that's fine. We all have an opinion.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

mulepacker said:


> we do need to watch and critique our intersets. There does need to be a defined set of values, ethics and standards, besides the regulations I believe this is the purpose a fair chase philosophy. I also think that in the past few years technology and trophy hunting have became an issue that needs to be addressed as to what is acceptable to the hunting fraternity. It would be unfortunate that a vocal minority caused the demise of hunting as we or our grandfathers knew it.
> 
> Now back to my thought, as a fraternity is it time to revisit fair chase? I believe so before our market crashes.


I second the motion.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Good post Travis.



> Pro -- do you believe that it is time to look at "fair chase" and update it's definition? Is hunting still within the realm of "fair chase", as defined by the Boone and Crockett club to be "in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the game animals."


I don't even know how you can define "fair" let alone have it as a 'standard' to be honest. What is 'fair' to me is different than to you/mulepacker. I think the use of atv's/gps/long range weapons/high powered optics/google earth/internet give at least as much of an advantage to the hunter over the game animals as hiring a guide service. An individual can use EVERY tactic that guides legally use, sometimes they have MORE resources at their disposal. I truly believe most of the ado on this is about ENVY and pettiness. Some, like my friend mulepacker, have legit concerns issues that are brought up in reasonable ways. Others are brought up in childish manners with little/no merit or validity, those I dismiss. I am 100% in favor of Utah having a guide association with rules/guidelines to adhere to. I also am 100% in favor of always taking a look at how I enjoy the opportunities I have to pursue big game and make a few pennies doing so, and seeing where/how I can do a better service and do it in a way my heritage would approve of.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Money and greed is poison for a lot of things and hunting doesn't dodge this bullet. 
Paying for flesh and big, big dollars creates all kinds of questionable tactics and antics.

How many guides do you know that push grey or into the red ethically and/or legally to produce and fulfill a contract?

I'll completely exclude Pro because I know even when high dollars are involved he is always thinking about the basics like appreciation,respect,ethics, rules, values, skill building, teaching, laws, boundaries, etc.


----------



## weatherby25 (Sep 10, 2007)

> send me an e-mail address


I sent tree the pics I have of your bull.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Harry Nutzack said:


> Money and greed is poison for a lot of things and hunting doesn't dodge this bullet.
> Paying for flesh and big, big dollars creates all kinds of questionable tactics and antics.
> 
> How many guides do you know that push grey or into the red ethically and/or legally to produce and fulfill a contract?


Money has also created a lot of good and hunting doesn't dodge this bullet!

I don't know of any, I am sure there are some out there, but I have never worked with/for or had any that work for me "push" the line. I do however know of MANY average hunters who "push" the line for multiple reasons. Mossback is under a microscope because of their success, so if they were going into the "red ethically" I think there would be at least some shred of evidence to support such claims. I would think that anyone with the ability to use reason and have an original thought pop out of their "gray matter" would wonder why no one has been able to produce any proof yet. -Ov-


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Harry Nutzack said:
> 
> 
> > Money and greed is poison for a lot of things and hunting doesn't dodge this bullet.
> ...


In what ways does big money exchanging hands between Johns and Pimp's help hunting?
In prostitution, Pimps at least are supposed to protect the prostitutes, however its the opposite in hunting they kill the animal.
There are a lot of other states and countrys that guiding is no longer permitted for this reason.

You mean no video proof regarding illegal practices? I'm pretty sure there has been a grundle of reports made.
I know quite a few guides that have been dinged and prosecuted for illegal practices. A lot of them went on for months and years before anything was done.

You don't believe money, especially large sums of money wont pursuade people to commit crimes?


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

Harry Nutzack said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="Harry Nutzack":t9pyon12]Money and greed is poison for a lot of things and hunting doesn't dodge this bullet.
> ...


In what ways does big money exchanging hands between Johns and Pimp's help hunting?
In prostitution, Pimps at least are supposed to protect the prostitutes, however its the opposite in hunting they kill the animal.
*There are a lot of other states and countrys that guiding is no longer permitted for this reason.
*
You mean no video proof regarding illegal practices? I'm pretty sure there has been a grundle of reports made.
I know quite a few guides that have been dinged and prosecuted for illegal practices. A lot of them went on for months and years before anything was done.

You don't believe money, especially large sums of money wont pursuade people to commit crimes?[/quote:t9pyon12]

Which ones? I wasn't aware of any, but if there are I'd like to know.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Harry Nutzack said:


> In what ways does big money exchanging hands between Johns and Pimp's help hunting?
> In prostitution, Pimps at least are supposed to protect the prostitutes, however its the opposite in hunting they kill the animal.
> There are a lot of other states and countrys that guiding is no longer permitted for this reason.
> 
> ...


Money is NEEDED to buy/restore habitat, that is a FACT in today's world. You sound like an anti-hunter with comments about killing the animals, so it makes more sense now that I see what your mindset is. Thanks ofr helping me connect all the dots.

Lots of assertions/claims/rumors, but not ONE conviction of a Mossback employee. Either they are smarter than the rest of the planet, or they are innocent. I KNOW it to be the latter, because most of them aren't all that smart. That is why they guide the rich folk instead of being the rich folk. Doyle has way too much at stake to risk being caught doing illegal practices. If he were caught his business would be DONE. He is smart enough to know that, and he has spent 20+ years building his biz into the BEST out there for putting trophy aniamls of this caliber on the ground.

Of course money can/does persuade people to commit crimes, so does drug addiction/stupidity/laziness. But, that does not mean that all that make/spend/want money are criminal or evil. :roll:

What states have banned guiding on public land? I want specifics since you keep making unsupported claims. :?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I don't even know how you can define "fair" let alone have it as a 'standard' to be honest. What is 'fair' to me is different than to you/mulepacker. I think the use of atv's/gps/long range weapons/high powered optics/google earth/internet give at least as much of an advantage [/b]to the hunter over the game animals as hiring a guide service[/b]. [/i]An individual can use EVERY tactic that guides legally use, sometimes they have MORE resources at their disposal.[/i]


With that being said, how do you feel with regards to the Boone and Crockett definition of 'fair chase': "the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animal *in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals.*"

See, Pro, you keep wanting to make this a guide service vs. individuals issue. I don't see it that way. I see it as a hunting issue. Guide service or not, do you see a need for an update to what should be considered "fair chase"? Leave guides out of it. Is there an issue? I think there is. I think it's time for "sportsmen" to step up to the plate.



proutdoors said:


> Others are brought up in childish manners with little/no merit or validity, those I dismiss.


whew! And there for a while, I thought maybe I was one of those "others" doing things in a "childish manner" who you would simply dismiss. Obviously, if my thoughts were in that category, you would have dismissed yourself 7 pages ago! I'll take that as a compliment! Thanks Pro -- I appreciate your willingness to discuss my legitimate concerns with you.



proutdoors said:


> I am 100% in favor of Utah having a guide association with rules/guidelines to adhere to. I also am 100% in favor of always taking a look at how I enjoy the opportunities I have to pursue big game and make a few pennies doing so, and seeing where/how I can do a better service and do it in a way my heritage would approve of.


I am also 100% in favor of Utah having a guide association with rules/guidlines that guides must adhere to. I think that such an association should not be limited to only big game guides, but include fishing guides as well. I am also in favor of taking a look at how I enjoy the opportunities I have to pursue big game (and fish). I am not in favor of anyone that looks to limit my opportunities to pursue those fish or big game. Personally, I am not looking to gain any financial increase through my pursuit of fish or big game. With that being said, I am always in favor of seeing where/how I can do a better service in my volunteer efforts to improve the wildlife of Utah, and in doing so making my heritage proud.

See, we agree on many things.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> See, Pro, you keep wanting to make this a guide service vs. individuals issue. I don't see it that way. I see it as a hunting issue. Guide service or not, do you see a need for an update to what should be considered "fair chase"? Leave guides out of it. Is there an issue? I think there is. I think it's time for "sportsmen" to step up to the plate.
> 
> I am fine with that, but who draws the line?
> 
> ...


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Are you saying we should have no tag limits?[/color] :?


Now who's being childish?

You also asked "who draws the line" with regards to updating "fair chase". Who would you think? Pam Anderson? You spew garbage about "a little bit of thought" but then you come up with comments like that? I would have thought you would have been reasonable enough to think that maybe sportsmen themselves could come up with some updated ethical guidelines for what "fair chase" should be. Would it be too difficult, or ethically too unattainable to think that sportsmen could abide by some rules where "the kill is the exception and escape is the rule"? Simply put, I agree with the statement "a chase is fair if the animal has a reasonable chance of escaping the pursuit unharmed."

In today's hunting world, and fishing world, our expectations as sportsmen have nearly become unrealistic. There are too many hunters who base the success of a hunt on the filling of a tag. The competitiveness of hunting has only driven expectations higher and higher. How is it possible to satisfy those expectations for everyone? What happened to hunting, and when did the kill become the most important part of being in the outdoors? At what point did it become acceptable to "purchase" a world record?


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

Pro as a parent I am sure you have played the fair card. As parents we have an obligation to be fair to each of our children. However more often than not a child might not view our decisions or actions as fair. 
In every facet of life fairness is resolved. In the general public it is simply public opinion that determines fairness it does not insure each of us agree what fair is, ethics fall under the same realm. Take child prostitution for instance, in many Asian countries it is legal, is it fair or ethical. Hell any prostitution for that matter?
At least from where I stand and from what I read I believe there is enough concern from Joe Public Hunter that we need to look at fairness as a standard today. How many organizations have been fromed in the past few years to promote or protect America's system of Wildlife managemnt I believe this supports a need. Unfortuantely if my perception is correct, Utah is pushing the envelope more than any other state. I believe you hit the nail on the head, if we had a regulatory agency for commercial hunting many if not all of these issues would be mute.
I do know of offers to bounty hunt, there hasn't been a year go by in the past 5 where I have not received an offer. It would be easy to sell out a simple phone call would suffice. IMO bounty hunting is not fair chase, I won't participate for any amount of money or fame. That does not mean I would not guide or outfit given the right opportuntiy, I have been there done that. Just a few days prior to the N Cache LE hunt a father got on a public radio bulletin board and offered to pay a finders fee for a trophy elk for his 22 year old son. WE are stretching the limits.
So yes fair can and must be defined, not for any certain individual but for the welfare of the state.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> Now who's being childish?
> 
> You also asked "who draws the line" with regards to updating "fair chase". Who would you think? Pam Anderson? You spew garbage about "a little bit of thought" but then you come up with comments like that? I would have thought you would have been reasonable enough to think that maybe sportsmen themselves could come up with some updated ethical guidelines for what "fair chase" should be. Would it be too difficult, or ethically too unattainable to think that sportsmen could abide by some rules where "the kill is the exception and escape is the rule"? Simply put, I agree with the statement "a chase is fair if the animal has a reasonable chance of escaping the pursuit unharmed."
> 
> In today's hunting world, and fishing world, our expectations as sportsmen have nearly become unrealistic. There are too many hunters who base the success of a hunt on the filling of a tag. The competitiveness of hunting has only driven expectations higher and higher. How is it possible to satisfy those expectations for everyone? What happened to hunting, and when did the kill become the most important part of being in the outdoors? At what point did it become acceptable to "purchase" a world record?


Just when I think we are reaching common ground you act like a #%$. Why? :? You said, " I am not in favor of anyone that looks to *limit* my opportunities to pursue those fish or big game." I am simply asking for you to explain such a comment, as it makes NO SENSE to me.

You said:


> Simply put, I agree with the statement "a chase is fair if the animal has a reasonable chance of escaping the pursuit unharmed."


Then why are saying we need to change it? :roll:

I am as obsessed with chasing/killing trophy animals as anyone I know, but I was willing to come home with tag soup if I couldn't kill the bull that met MY standards. I put in the effort/time to get it done, but the bull I was after won the right to keep breathing. What category does that put me in?

The world record was NOT "bought", it was earned by hard work and the willingness to keep after it day after day. :?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> The world record was NOT "bought", it was earned by hard work and the willingness to keep after it day after day. :?


I would disagree...I think by all intents and purposes it was bought. Would Mr. Austad have shot the bull without Mossback? Would he have shot the bull without purchasing the governor's tag? I think, then, it is very fair to say that he purchased the world record....

...which leads me to something else. The Boone and Crockett club does little--if anything at all--to disregard animals that are not taken ethically. Sure, they condone ethical practices and push ethical hunting, but they don't dig into the methods of how animals are taken.

According to their website, "The final score of a potential Boone and Crockett World's Record must be verified by either an Awards Program Judges Panel or a Special Judges Panel before it is declared a new World's Record. Awards Program Judges Panels are assembled once every three years following the close of one of the Club's triennial Awards Programs. In addition to certifying new World's Records, these panels also verify the final scores of the top 5 trophies entered in each category during the preceding three years and certify them for coveted B&C medals and certificates. Special Judges Panels are convened during the interim between Awards Program Judges Panels with the sole purpose of verifying and declaring new World's Records. In either case, two teams of two judges each measure a potential World's Record. If the scores of both teams verify the original measurement, the panel will declare it a new World's Record. If a potential World's Record is not sent in for verification by one of these two panels, it will never be declared a Boone and Crockett World's Record."

From what I understand, Boone and Crockett is more worried about "where" the animal is shot and "what" it scores rather than "how" it was shot.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> From what I understand, Boone and Crockett is more worried about "where" the animal is shot and "what" it scores rather than "how" it was shot.


If that is the case how do you explain their rejection of the Shipley bull taken on the San Carlos Indian Reservation a few years back that went over 500"? :roll: A bull like this WILL be investigated.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> If that is the case how do you explain their rejection of the Shipley bull taken on the San Carlos Indian Reservation a few years back that went over 500"? :roll: A bull like this WILL be investigated.


I know nothing of this bull and don't care...but there is probably a good chance that this bull was at least, in part, reasoning for the B&C club to create the "Entry Affidavit" requirement.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Just when I think we are reaching common ground you act like a #%$. Why? :? You said, " I am not in favor of anyone that looks to *limit* my opportunities to pursue those fish or big game." I am simply asking for you to explain such a comment, as it makes NO SENSE to me.


Why so defensive? This comment had little-to-nothing to do with you. It meant that I am not in favor of groups that attempt to limit hunting, or to limit my hunting and fishing opportunities. Tag limits are a necessisity -- any moron, including 'yote understands that. I enjoy hunting, just like you.



proutdoors said:


> You said:
> 
> 
> > Simply put, I agree with the statement "a chase is fair if the animal has a reasonable chance of escaping the pursuit unharmed."
> ...


We don't need to change the statement! We need to change what we are doing to pursue those animals. I'll ask again, did Spidey have the chance of escaping? Consider, he had multiple guides watching his every move for the last 5 months! Did this bull have a legitimate chance of surviving and escaping this hunt "unharmed"? I don't believe he did. I don't see how you can argue otherwise. Thus, the need for a change.



proutdoors said:


> I am as obsessed with chasing/killing trophy animals as anyone I know, but I was willing to come home with tag soup if I couldn't kill the bull that met MY standards. I put in the effort/time to get it done, but the bull I was after won the right to keep breathing. What category does that put me in?


That puts you in the same category as many of us. It makes you average. Just like me. But, why on Earth do you continue to try to make this issue about you?  It isn't about you.



proutdoors said:


> The world record was NOT "bought", it was earned by hard work and the willingness to keep after it day after day. :?


keep after it day, after day? By who? The guides! This bull was purchased. W2U asked a very legitimate question: had Mr. Austad not purchased the tag, and not hired Mossback to guide his hunt, would he have killed this bull? I have my doubts. He purchased this bull. But, I applaud him for it. It's a magnificent animal.


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

what about when the indians chased buffalo on their horses and shot them with weapons they had used their opposable thumbs to create?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

EPEK said:


> what about when the indians chased buffalo on their horses and shot them with weapons they had used their opposable thumbs to create?


 -()/- <<--O/ -O>>-


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Harry Nutzack said:
> 
> 
> > In what ways does big money exchanging hands between Johns and Pimp's help hunting?
> ...


So all the money that is paid to guides goes to habitat??? No shizzle? I had no idea I guess you learn something new everyday.

If someone told you they wanted a specific animal would you commit a crime to get it for them? I doubt it.
If someone told you they wanted a specific animal and you made a contract with them to this effect with a large sum of money to get it for them would you commit a crime to get it for them? The odds you would goes way up. If its a nice chunk of change and the fine is nothing, it goes way up. If its not likely you would get dinged for it, it goes way up as well.

Money is a huge motivator as is an addiction. Stupidity and laziness have no motivation behind them so not anywhere near as likely however.


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

You trying to tell me that that old man has been chasing that elk around the hills for 30 days or so...BULL CRAP!...I don't belive it for one **** minute. That is young man's work. Mossback and the boys are the real "HUNTERS"...Denny Austad might be or has been a great hunter, but this time and all the other "guided" hunts...he just did the killing!


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

> The Boone and Crockett club does little--if anything at all--to disregard animals that are not taken ethically. Sure, they condone ethical practices and push ethical hunting, but they don't dig into the methods of how animals are taken.


You speak the truth.

I PERSONALLY know of two sets of SHEDS that were purchased from a friend of mine that are now entered in the B&C records as animals taken with a rifle. :lol: :roll:

Is having an animal in the books really THAT important... Sheesh.

Would there be any LESS scuttle-butt and rumor spreading about this bull being shot if some Joe Shmo would have taken him with a longbow and a flint tipped arrow all by himself?

Knowing what I know about human nature, Hell NO!


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> From what I understand, Boone and Crockett is more worried about "where" the animal is shot and "what" it scores rather than "how" it was shot.


Well the bull was probably standing broad side and Denny might have been using mossback shooting sticks and he busted spider in the front shoulder and he fell to the ground so that probably "how" it was shot.



> I know nothing of this bull and don't care


Congrats Wyo2ut you finally came out and admitted that you know nothing.

This bull was killed on a "fair chase hunt" on a LE hunt. Any archery hunt could have killed this bull. Any rifle hunter could have killed this bull, even all the ML hunters had a chance to kill this bull. Mossback lost this bull for two weeks and they spend hours and days looing for this bull, but they never gave up and kept looking meanwhile other hunters gave up and settled for lesser bulls.

People are on here talk about the techology used for hunting. I guess in October I will see many hunters in buckskins with a rock they sharpened into a knife. Im surprised that even Mulepacker brought up technology and his underwear because in his picture I see a gun with a scope.

I never thought Utah hunters would be making arguments about hunting like we have seen year after year when Mossback kills trophy bulls. I think these hunters are more like PETA and I fear PETA less. Why do we even need to fair chase when it comes to Mossback killing big bulls.

Guiding Services haven't hurt hunting. Guide Service enhance hunting. They give hunters hopes and dreams of killing bulls like Spider meanwhile enjoying the great outdoors. Hunting isn't all about killing animals. It's about the experience. I killed a great bull with Mossback, but I remember the experiences from the hunt a lot more and it was fun hunting for 10 days looking for a good buck the the whole experience was just AWESOME and something I will always remember.

Mossback didnt injury the animal before they killed and I will be willing to bet that many fish cops were watching people on the Monroe. If Mossback never found this bull I know Denny would have eaten tag soup, but Mossback teaches hunters a valuable lesson...never give up on the animals you are pursuing because sooner or later you will find him and be successful. Mossback also passed upa lot of big bulls while out looking for the Spider bull.

Denny is a great man and hunter and he donated his money to wildlife. As for 1E and the rest of you please grow up and quit being so jealous. I think it's awesome that Utah now has the World Record Bull and it was killed on Public Land and everything was ethical.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

BPturkeys said:


> You trying to tell me that that old man has been chasing that elk around the hills for 30 days or so...BULL CRAP!...I don't belive it for one **** minute. That is young man's work. Mossback and the boys are the real "HUNTERS"...Denny Austad might be or has been a great hunter, but this time and all the other "guided" hunts...he just did the killing!


 :lol: Pretty much.

It cracks me up when this stuff is put up as fair chase... Please. Fair maybe in that the thundering herd earned their paycheck with all the days spent looking and the boots they broke in nicely while chasing around the hills but I'm right there with you in that this was bought and gift wrapped. The hundreds of thousands of dollars make for a tidy bow wrapped around those antlers. For the life of me, I can't figure out why folks insist on trying to pass this off as a good thing... these hunts are a sham and totally NOT representative of how most of us conduct ourselves when we take to the hills in the fall. Folks say all that dough goes to wildlife and habitat but I'm not sure I totally buy that either. I know everyone says we can't be divided but hell, there is just such a huge difference in how hunts like this are conducted and the way most simple folks are out getting it done that I don't see how there can't be some sort of line between the two styles of hunting. Some things never change and the situation where the best stuff seems to go to the guy willing to cough up dollars for it is one of em.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> If Mossback never found this bull I know Denny would have eaten tag soup, but Mossback teaches hunters a valuable lesson...
> 
> I think it's awesome that Utah now has the World Record Bull and it was killed on Public Land and everything was ethical.


First part... c'mon man... you can't seriously believe it when you type stuff like that. Nobody pays a hundred grand for a tag to eat it and this guy wouldn't have done that either.

Second part... I agree that its cool Utah has the world record and that the bull was killed on public ground. Not cool is that this high dollar "fish in a barrel" shoot is being passed off as some grand, hard earned trophy to the masses who quite frankly are probably familiar with bullshiz when they smell it and aren't buying it anyway.


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

Riverrat77 said:


> Some things never change and the situation where the best stuff seems to go to the guy willing to cough up dollars for it is one of em.


I knew the real argument would eventually come out, as it always has on these kind of threads. It's the have-not's against the have's. It's the money and the things money can buy part of it that's the "problem". Wealthy people seem to (do) always have the best stuff. Homes, clothes, cars, vacations, schooling, eating out, jewelry, health care, and in this case, hunting. etc., etc.

And things never change because, since most of us aren't willing to change to be able to live their lifestyle, we want them to change to live ours, which they will never do. It'll be interesting how we'll regard Epek when he makes his broadhead business grow to the point (no pun intended) where he becomes too wealthy for some of us because he'll get to book hunts in exotic places for trophy animals, with guides, meals, housing, transportation, treestand or blind set-ups, and scouting included. (Whatever your dreams, Epek, don't ever spend that money on those kinds of hunts! :roll

Both the B&C and P&Y Clubs have a space for the guide's name and address on their record book applications, so they regard guiding services as ethical and fair chase. And if a guiding service that's been convicted of some violations or has been deemed unethical by the club shows up on the application, it's going to be investigated and probably rejected.

In time, we'll find out how Spidey, Denny, and Moss muster up. 'Til then, I for one, don't want to continue Spidey and these spin-offs.

BTW, I'm currently a have-not (retired school custodian), but I'm working on it with a non-hunting related ebay business. Wish me good fortune, or not!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Riverrat77 said:


> First part... c'mon man... you can't seriously believe it when you type stuff like that. Nobody pays a hundred grand for a tag to eat it and this guy wouldn't have done that either.


Ron Skoronski did it *TWO YEARS * in a row. That is a FACT! What do you say now? :roll:

elkfromabove, grand slam. You just hit that out of the park!


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Riverrat77 said:
> 
> 
> > First part... c'mon man... you can't seriously believe it when you type stuff like that. Nobody pays a hundred grand for a tag to eat it and this guy wouldn't have done that either.
> ...


I'd say its an EXTREME waste.... of money. But.... not my money, not my call. I'm sure somebody somewhere was glad to line their pockets with his cash while he lined his with unfilled tags. And I'm not hatin on the guy because he has a tag I'll never have.... I honestly could care less if I had to do all my hunting 15 minutes from my house while everyone else is scrambling after huge animals. They do their thing, I'll do mine and apparently we're both happy with what we get out of it. Like I said, from guys doing this on a small scale, there actually is a bit of humor to be had from these guys who pay a ton of money for one animal and have a ton of guys out doing their work for them.... while I might not think of it as fair chase, it makes for good comedy.... without the circus these yahoos provide, where else would we get creative pictures like the hand drawn one that was posted this year? :lol:

On a serious note.... in the upland section there was a gentleman that posted up a scene with a bunch of folks herding a buck antelope to its death. He saw this as he was out grouse hunting. I just wonder what kind of impression this "guys on cell phones, on every ridgetop, looking for one animal for a guy to hike up and shoot" type of hunting is leaving on the general public..... surely it can't leave a good taste in their mouth. I know the images these stories conjure up in my mind surely aren't ideal... has nothing to do with the guy spending money to be guided... if thats his deal, great. The amount of manpower driving the hunt for one particular critter just reminds me a lot of the "wheelers herding antelope" story I read in another forum.


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

I am ****y enough to believe that I can end this argument with facts. I feel that I have went deep enough into my thinking capabilities to figure this thing out. I promise you that this was ethical, fair chase. I have never seen a 'fish in the barrell' hunt when it comes to the wiles of Mule Deer and Elk in their enviroment. Everyone assumes that the mossback group camps on these animals and always knows where they are at and just bring in someone whom has a well sighted, high caliber rifle to 'aim into the barrel' and set up for a great photo op. I challenge any of you self proclaimed expert hunters to replicate this. Go find a good buck, observe him and his pattern, know where his beads are, know where he feeds, know where he goes on every one of his escape routes and know exactly how long he stays in his saftey zone until he goes back to his routine pattern. Know every time and every instance that he gets bumped out of this routine, know the preditor habits of the area, and how many times this good buck has to elude cougar attack attempts. Then when you alway know exaclty where he is going to be, know all of the possible approach routes you can take to get with in range of this majestic animal that lives in high elevation, far from where most can accomplish all of these mentioned tasks, and know that you can make these approaches with out being detected alerting this monster into taking one of his escape routes that you knew he was going to take on that particular instance. And make sure that the day this happens you have your shooter, the only one with a tag, to be in the right place at the right time and there you have it. I know with all in me that knows things, that this bull was hunted on his terms and in his enviroment but the hunters gained enough of a fair chase advantage to close the deal. This happens less than not, but in this case the deal was closed, and it happened because it happened and everyone on here assumes that because the deal was closed that it was an easy deal to close. I have had a lot of deals that did close while hunting, but I have had many more deals that could have closed, not close. Assume this: Of all of the animals that I have killed, it is pheasable to believe that you could rank them from the easiest to the most difficult. Some just sort of came together, some took a ton of work and stratagy to finally accomplish the harvest. With this assumption, my question is this. Was there something not as fair in the chase concerning the easy ones, and was there something more fair in the chase that I had to work my butt off to accomplish. Or.... would thay all fit into the catagory of fair chase, so they would all be considered full chase.

Now, as far as paying for the tag that allowed this guy to be in that situation.... consider this. Every one of us would like to have more money. And if money were not an object, I think every one of us would have liked to be the fortunate one that had the opportunity to be the trigger puller on the spider bull. We all then would have had this experience and could have ranked it in the relm of all of our other experiences and it could have been our best and most exciting thing we have ever done, or we could have liked the time we spent a ton of time at high altittude chasing 170 bucks with a bow a lot more (better). But, I will never condem any type of non criminal hunting. Condemming a style of hunting is condeming hunting. All styles of hunting catagories fall under the general catagory of "HUNTING". Those that mostly sit in a tree stand like that style, spot and stalkers like that one, rut callers love to call in big bulls in the rut, High Fence hunters or Ranch CWMU type hunts (not that they are the same) is a catagory that some choose. There are a ton of other type of styles, food plots, blinds, sitting on water, drives, road hunting, horse packing into the steep and deep. All of these styles are hunting and although I haven't subscribed to all of them, I have enjoyed every one of them I have tried in their time and in their season. If I had a million dollars, I might even try someday buying a great tag and hiring an aggressive guide service to help me get a wonderful photo op. It would be really cool to have a picture of me holding a world record elk behind my desk and a full body mount of him climbing a rock stand over in the corner of my office. That would simply be one of the styles of HUNTING that I would have experienced in my life (if it happened) and that should never be criticized by hunters, that should be criticized by non hunters, or even worse, anti hunters. If a guy has enough money to spend on an experience that he would really enjoy, why should anyone have something negative to say about that. What if he wanted to spend $175,000.00 so that he could 'experience' what it would be like to mine coal deep in the bowls of the earth. After he spent the money and road the coal train into the mountain and had that experience, he would either treasure that experience by enjoying the memory or he would not. I bet this guy treasured the experience and always enjoy the memory of the time he spent a good amount of money to purchase a great tag in a great state with great possiblities of harvesting a great animal, and that he knew he could enhance that experience if he spent a bit more money on an aggressive guide service so that he could be the guy that was there the day it all came together and he stood above the world record bull elk taken via fair chase with a rifle. 

As far as Mossback is concerned, God bless America.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Riverrat77 said:
> 
> 
> > First part... c'mon man... you can't seriously believe it when you type stuff like that. Nobody pays a hundred grand for a tag to eat it and this guy wouldn't have done that either.
> ...


I'd say two things: 1) Fair and equal opportunity? I know I will never in my life have two LE elk tags in back to back years...2) Any guy that has the money to not only buy multiple tags for 100 grand+ is also a guy who probably wouldn't blink at eating that 100 grand...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > Riverrat77 said:
> ...


So what? I have drawn a tag THREE times on the Dutton since 2000! Notice I said "drawn". I have killed two bulls over 360 and passed up several in the 360+ range this year.

You finally have come clean and admitted it is NOT about hunting but it is about another hunter having more money than you. Do you also cry at night knowing other people have bigger houses than you, have nicer autos than you, take more exotic trips than you, hunt in more states than you? Seriously, you need to get over it!

EPEK, that is an EPIC post! Well stated and well reasoned.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> I'd say two things: 1) Fair and equal opportunity? I know I will never in my life have two LE elk tags in back to back years...2) Any guy that has the money to not only buy multiple tags for 100 grand+ is also a guy who probably wouldn't blink at eating that 100 grand...


It means he is willing to home and put steak sauce on his tag and eat it. Its not all about killing an animal and if they cannot get a good shot at the animal then they don't take the shot. These men don't take chances at wounding animals. They don't shoot across a canyon hoping to connect. They have better ethics then a lot of average joe hunters.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> So what? I have drawn a tag THREE times on the Dutton since 2000! Notice I said "drawn". I have killed two bulls over 360 and passed up several in the 360+ range this year.
> 
> You finally have come clean and admitted it is NOT about hunting but it is about another hunter having more money than you. Do you also cry at night knowing other people have bigger houses than you, have nicer autos than you, take more exotic trips than you, hunt in more states than you? Seriously, you need to get over it!
> 
> EPEK, that is an EPIC post! Well stated and well reasoned.


So what? You come on this forum repeatedly asking for ways of increasing the draw odds, moving people through the draw quicker so that EVERYONE has a chance of getting tags...and, yet almost in the same breath, you condone and actually imply that the auctioning off of tags to the highest bidder is fair?

I have mentioned this multiple times...hunting should NOT be a rich man's sport. But, sadly, we are slowly making it that way. Get real, Bart, you know dang well this isn't about who's house or car is better/bigger or who can take the best trips...this is about a past time that should be shared equally among all walks of life and not just doled out to the rich.

Again, let me pose the question...you know, the one that you repeatedly refuse to answer: Would Mr Austad have killed that bull without Mossback, without the money to buy the Governor's tag, and on his own merits? The bottom line is that he purchased a public animal...


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> So what? You come on this forum repeatedly asking for ways of increasing the draw odds, moving people through the draw quicker so that EVERYONE has a chance of getting tags...and, yet almost in the same breath, you condone and actually imply that the auctioning off of tags to the highest bidder is fair?
> 
> I have mentioned this multiple times...hunting should NOT be a rich man's sport. But, sadly, we are slowly making it that way. Get real, Bart, you know dang well this isn't about who's house or car is better/bigger or who can take the best trips...this is about a past time that should be shared equally among all walks of life and not just doled out to the rich.
> 
> Again, let me pose the question...you know, the one that you repeatedly refuse to answer: Would Mr Austad have killed that bull without Mossback, without the money to buy the Governor's tag, and on his own merits? The bottom line is that he purchased a public animal...


*ONE* tag issued to the highest bidder for a *statewide tag* does NOT affect your/my draw odds by even .00001%. I never said it was "fair", if you paid attention you would notice I don't like the word "fair" as it is impossible to define what "fair" is. Is it "fair" that you were born w/o the ability to use common sense? Is it "fair" that coyoteslayer is in a wheelchair? Is it "fair" that 1I is a moron? Is it "fair" that some people are born rich/poor/black/white/dumb/smart/ugly/pretty? It's called LIFE!

Reading your post it implies that by Denny having this tag you were 'forced' to sit at home crying while rambling to yourself about how "unfair" life is that you see everything so negative. :roll:

I doubt Denny would have killed this bull w/o Mossback. I also doubt I would have had as enjoyable hunt as I did w/o the people who HELPED me on my hunt. Bottom line is he used the resources available to him just as I did. Let's pretend he did have 50 people looking for him, which is NOT true, how many hunters w/family and friends had archery/rifle/muzzy tags on the Monroe? I can say with 100% certainty it was MORE than 50 people! So, that means either all the other hunters are poor hunters, or Mossback is just a whole lot better at finding ONE animal than the rest of the people who were looking for spidey, including MANY outfitters/guides not working for Mossback.


----------



## bowgy (Oct 10, 2007)

> Pro wrote: I have killed two bulls over 360 and passed up several in the 360+ range this year.


 Wow, that could be taken out of context :wink: :lol:



> Pro wrote:I never said it was "fair", if you paid attention you would notice I don't like the word "fair" as it is impossible to define what "fair" is. Is it "fair" that you were born w/o the ability to use common sense? Is it "fair" that coyoteslayer is in a wheelchair? Is it "fair" that 1I is a moron?


Now that is funny, I dont't care who ya are. Glad I wasn't drinking milk while reading it or I would have to clean the screen and keyboard. :mrgreen:


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

bowgy said:


> > Pro wrote: I have killed two bulls over 360 and passed up several in the 360+ range this year.
> 
> 
> Wow, that could be taken out of context :wink: :lol:
> ...


Now that is funny, I dont't care who ya are. Glad I wasn't drinking milk while reading it or I would have to clean the screen and keyboard. :mrgreen:[/quote:2nq7c31z]I see where I wasn't as clear as I could/should be. I have drawn three tags for bull elk on the Dutton since 2000. In 2000 I killed a 360+ bull, in 2003 I killed a 370 class bull, in 2008 I passed several that went 360+. 

:mrgreen:


----------



## seniorsetterguy (Sep 22, 2007)

EPEK said:


> I am ****y enough to believe that I can end this argument with facts. I feel that I have went deep enough into my thinking capabilities to figure this thing out. I promise you that this was ethical, fair chase. I have never seen a 'fish in the barrell' hunt when it comes to the wiles of Mule Deer and Elk in their enviroment. Everyone assumes that the mossback group camps on these animals and always knows where they are at and just bring in someone whom has a well sighted, high caliber rifle to 'aim into the barrel' and set up for a great photo op. I challenge any of you self proclaimed expert hunters to replicate this. Go find a good buck, observe him and his pattern, know where his beads are, know where he feeds, know where he goes on every one of his escape routes and know exactly how long he stays in his saftey zone until he goes back to his routine pattern. Know every time and every instance that he gets bumped out of this routine, know the preditor habits of the area, and how many times this good buck has to elude cougar attack attempts. Then when you alway know exaclty where he is going to be, know all of the possible approach routes you can take to get with in range of this majestic animal that lives in high elevation, far from where most can accomplish all of these mentioned tasks, and know that you can make these approaches with out being detected alerting this monster into taking one of his escape routes that you knew he was going to take on that particular instance. And make sure that the day this happens you have your shooter, the only one with a tag, to be in the right place at the right time and there you have it. I know with all in me that knows things, that this bull was hunted on his terms and in his enviroment but the hunters gained enough of a fair chase advantage to close the deal. This happens less than not, but in this case the deal was closed, and it happened because it happened and everyone on here assumes that because the deal was closed that it was an easy deal to close. I have had a lot of deals that did close while hunting, but I have had many more deals that could have closed, not close. Assume this: Of all of the animals that I have killed, it is pheasable to believe that you could rank them from the easiest to the most difficult. Some just sort of came together, some took a ton of work and stratagy to finally accomplish the harvest. With this assumption, my question is this. Was there something not as fair in the chase concerning the easy ones, and was there something more fair in the chase that I had to work my butt off to accomplish. Or.... would thay all fit into the catagory of fair chase, so they would all be considered full chase.
> 
> Now, as far as paying for the tag that allowed this guy to be in that situation.... consider this. Every one of us would like to have more money. And if money were not an object, I think every one of us would have liked to be the fortunate one that had the opportunity to be the trigger puller on the spider bull. We all then would have had this experience and could have ranked it in the relm of all of our other experiences and it could have been our best and most exciting thing we have ever done, or we could have liked the time we spent a ton of time at high altittude chasing 170 bucks with a bow a lot more (better). But, I will never condem any type of non criminal hunting. Condemming a style of hunting is condeming hunting. All styles of hunting catagories fall under the general catagory of "HUNTING". Those that mostly sit in a tree stand like that style, spot and stalkers like that one, rut callers love to call in big bulls in the rut, High Fence hunters or Ranch CWMU type hunts (not that they are the same) is a catagory that some choose. There are a ton of other type of styles, food plots, blinds, sitting on water, drives, road hunting, horse packing into the steep and deep. All of these styles are hunting and although I haven't subscribed to all of them, I have enjoyed every one of them I have tried in their time and in their season. If I had a million dollars, I might even try someday buying a great tag and hiring an aggressive guide service to help me get a wonderful photo op. It would be really cool to have a picture of me holding a world record elk behind my desk and a full body mount of him climbing a rock stand over in the corner of my office. That would simply be one of the styles of HUNTING that I would have experienced in my life (if it happened) and that should never be criticized by hunters, that should be criticized by non hunters, or even worse, anti hunters. If a guy has enough money to spend on an experience that he would really enjoy, why should anyone have something negative to say about that. What if he wanted to spend $175,000.00 so that he could 'experience' what it would be like to mine coal deep in the bowls of the earth. After he spent the money and road the coal train into the mountain and had that experience, he would either treasure that experience by enjoying the memory or he would not. I bet this guy treasured the experience and always enjoy the memory of the time he spent a good amount of money to purchase a great tag in a great state with great possiblities of harvesting a great animal, and that he knew he could enhance that experience if he spent a bit more money on an aggressive guide service so that he could be the guy that was there the day it all came together and he stood above the world record bull elk taken via fair chase with a rifle.
> 
> As far as Mossback is concerned, God bless America.


Nice post...but "ethical" and "legal" are not always the same. So, the debate will go on.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Pro -- it's a simple question: Do you honestly believe that Spidey had a "fair" chance at escaping this years hunt unharmed?

I don't believe that Spidey had _any_ chance to survive through this hunt.

that's all I want to know.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Pro -- it's a simple question: Do you honestly believe that Spidey had a "fair" chance at escaping this years hunt unharmed?
> 
> that's all I want to know


I can answer this too. I believe sooner or later someone would have killed Spider because a lot of people were looking for him. The Spider bull is a wild animal and he escaped people last year. He didnt get big by being stupid.

Mossback was just lucky to get him before another hunter did because Archey/Rifle/ML hunters all had a chance to take him.

Yes it was a fair chase, but when you pursue an animal for months then sooner or later that animal will make a mistake.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> Pro -- it's a simple question: Do you honestly believe that Spidey had a "fair" chance at escaping this years hunt unharmed?
> 
> I don't believe that Spidey had _any_ chance to survive through this hunt.
> 
> that's all I want to know.


How many times do I need to answer the STUPID question for you brothers? Try and pay attention! What is "FAIR"? Spidey made it over a month, and outsmarted HUNDREDS of hunters, I say that shows he had a "fair" chance of surviving this years hunt*s*.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

PBH Spider was killed two days before the ML hunt ends. It sounds like he escaped a lot of hunters. Are you going to ask this stupid question 10 minutes from now or tomorrow?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> Yes it was a fair chase, but when you pursue an animal for months then sooner or later that animal will make a mistake.


Exactly my point. The animal didn't have a chance. He was pursued for months, non-stop, by the same people. Keep in mind, there was only 1 tag that was allowed to hunt for months. All other hunters that had LE Monroe tags only got to hunt 1 hunt. the governor's tag was an exception.

for all other hunters, I believe "fair chase" was adhered to. For the governor's tag, I don't believe you can call it "fair chase".

Pro -- "What is fair"?

Defintion Fair (Google web defintion): free from favoritism or self-interest or bias or deception; conforming with established standards or rules.

So, now that you have the definition of "fair", could you give me a yes or a no? the 'yote gave me a "yes, but...". He had to justify his answer.


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

I would have to agree History tells us that Spidey had 0% chance of having survived this hunt.

Now if that is fair or not I guess we will wait for Pro's response.


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

What in THEEEE hell is "unfair chase" about the govenors tag??
Just because someone is allowed to hunt an animal non-stop for 4 months you consider that unfair?

A person pays a hell of a lot of money for a tag like that for that type of "opportunity", where is the unfairness in that......WTF?? 

It's one tag that we ALL have an opportunity to buy, unfortunately most of us can't afford it, who's at fault for something like that??

I'd blame myself for not being so fortunate!


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

The question is, however, "fair chase" which Pro will, without a doubt, answer a wholehearted "yes" to.

There are a grundle of incredibly horny hunters out there that will do anything to get an animal any way they can. The bigger it is, the more horny they get. Nothing else matters. If you tied the critter to a tree they would hapilly shoot it without question. These are the types of clients Pro gets knocking on his door. Pro is happy to see this type of hunter and therefore sees it the same way, if he didn't he wouldn't be a guide would he?

You could use a sledgehammer and I don't think it's going to put even a small ding in Pro's head.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

> Just because someone is allowed to hunt an animal non-stop for 4 months you consider that unfair?


It wasn't that long ago in Utah, that a hunter could hunt archery, muzzie, and rifle - all three hunts in pursuit of filling his/her one deer tag. That certainly was fair chase. It is still only one tag.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Exactly my point. The animal didn't have a chance. He was pursued for months, non-stop, by the same people. Keep in mind, there was only 1 tag that was allowed to hunt for months. All other hunters that had LE Monroe tags only got to hunt 1 hunt. the governor's tag was an exception.
> 
> for all other hunters, I believe "fair chase" was adhered to. For the governor's tag, I don't believe you can call it "fair chase".
> 
> ...


*I knew you would ask this dumb question about. Only one hunter could have shot the Spider bull. Are you saying that hunters who draw Premium tags (they can hunt all three hunts) aren't participating in "fair chase" hunt because they have more time to hunt?*


----------



## boondockin1 (Oct 2, 2008)

If you have enough money you don't have unit boundries.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Harry Nutzack said:


> The question is however fair chase which Pro will answer a wholehearted "yes" to.
> 
> There are a grundle of incredibly horny hunters out there that will do anything to get an animal any way they can. The bigger it is, the more horny they get. Nothing else matters. If you tied the critter to a tree they would hapilly shoot it without question. These are the types of clients Pro gets knocking on his door. Pro is happy to see this type of hunter and therefore sees it the same way, if he didn't he wouldn't be a guide would he?
> 
> *You could use a sledgehammer and I don't think it's going to put even a small ding in Pro's head.*


Your last sentence is the only one with any truth in it. :shock:

I DO think this bull was taken under MY definition of "Fair Chase". I also contend it was taken under the guidelines governing B&C.

I would have nothing to do with a hunter who would be willing to shoot an animal tied to a tree, and they don't knock on my door. You display complete ignorance in why I and many others guide, and why MANY hunters hire guides. That is the one thing clear.

Travis, I have to disagree with you. You SHOULD know better, I expect ignorance from these other yokels, but not from you.  I can with 100% certainty say that this bull had a very good (FAIR) chance of escaping for the entire season. I would say it had a HIGHER chance of survival than the bull you harvested. Think about it, you killed a bull that's days were numbered. A bull of that caliber on that unit was doomed to a certain death. The spidey bull escaped ALL detection for weeks, and outsmarted hundreds of people during that time. Don't tell me it was 100% certain that Mossback would kill this bull this year, they're good but not that good. Otherwise this hunt would have ended September 1st, not September 30th.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Exactly my point. The animal didn't have a chance. He was pursued for months, non-stop, by the same people. Keep in mind, there was only 1 tag that was allowed to hunt for months. All other hunters that had LE Monroe tags only got to hunt 1 hunt. the governor's tag was an exception.


Your wrong again. How many Premium tags are issued on the Monroe????


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

Pro is in the business of being a "conservationist" (as am i) and understands it well.

Why do you guys keep beating up the wealthy trophy hunters who ARE the best "conservationists" we could ask for?
They bring in PILES of money to this state to better YOUR opportunities, what is so tough to understand about that?? 
It's not like they are taking ANYTHING away from you!!

Would you rather see them pay thousands of dollares to kill "subpar" animals that COULD grow into something qualified as a "trophy" (by record book standards), or be the conservationists that they are and only take the biggest, oldest animals out of a herd?

C'mon people, climb down off your pity pony and put in for some good tags and hunt your butt's off, you ARE equal to what the high dollar boys are doing in your particular unit!!


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

Does the governor's tag holder have to hunt with the weapon of the season and only during the season daes? If not I think you are comparing apples to oranges, with the premium tags.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

You forgot that the killer missed his quarry (about a 190 yard broadside shot) before he actually shot it later...and he left the mountain entirely for a time period.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> Pro -- "What is fair"?
> 
> Defintion Fair (Google web defintion): free from favoritism or *self-interest* or bias or deception; conforming with established standards or rules.
> 
> So, now that you have the definition of "fair", could you give me a yes or a no? the 'yote gave me a "yes, but...". He had to justify his answer.


Under that definition, none of us on here are 'fair'. :?

So, using *your* definition my answer is NO. Using *my* definition my answer is YES. Using B&C definition my answer is YES. Any more 'brilliant' questions?


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

mulepacker said:


> Does the governor's tag holder have to hunt with the weapon of the season and only during the season daes? If not I think you are comparing apples to oranges, with the premium tags.


Point is, whether Denny had this tag or not, spidey would have been hunted from late July through mid November. Is that 'ethical'? Or do 'ethics' only apply to 'rich' hunters being guided? This is NOTHING more than class envy!


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

If ONLY we could ALL be millionaires. :lol: :lol:


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

[Proutdoorsquote]I would have nothing to do with a hunter who would be willing to shoot an animal tied to a tree, and they don't knock on my door. You display complete ignorance in why I and many others guide, and why MANY hunters hire guides. That is the one thing clear.[/quote]

No shizzle??? I keep learing all kinds of things from you....

I've learned that money that is spent on guides doesn't go in the guides pocket, but rather goes to conservation and......

You have an application process (does it include a BCI as well) that you put your clients through that determines how ethically sound they are with some very interesting questions you ask them.

I want to know the tools (tests) you use to determine if you'll accept the clients money.


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

coyoteslayer said:


> If ONLY we could ALL be millionaires. :lol: :lol:


Ditto coyoteslayer!!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Point is, whether Denny had this tag or not, spidey would have been hunted from late July through mid November. Is that 'ethical'? Or do 'ethics' only apply to 'rich' hunters being guided? This is NOTHING more than class envy!


No, this is much more than class envy...this is giving one class more privileges/rights than other classes. This is about the famous quote made by the father of conservation--Teddy Roosevelt--and the man who established B&C to begin with: "The professional market hunter who kills game for the hide or for the feathers or for the meat or to sell antlers and other trophies; market men who put game in cold storage; and the rich people, who are content to buy what they have not the skill to get by their own exertions - these are the men who are the real enemies of game."

Historian Daniel Justin Herrman, in an article titled "Hunting Democracy", states, "American citizens, not those who governed them, were sovereign. IN the US, moreover, every adult...enjoyed another right that only kings and aristocrats had held in earlier centuries : the right to hunt....The right to hunt and the right to make political choices [vote] emerged simultaneously in the U.S." Herrman later observed: "At one moment, hunting has operated in American culture as a rite of democracy and at the next [moment] as a rite of aristocracy. that pendulum swing continues today." And, like Posewitz says, "..as this pendulum swings toward aristocracy, it knocks off more hunters and potential hunters than PETA and like groups could ever have hoped to do."

The truth is that the tag which was used to kill spidey was available only to the aristocracy or the upper class. We all know that someone who works a relatively low paying--yet noble--job has virtually no chance of buying these coveted governor's tags. The state of Utah is setting these tags aside for the highest bidders...those of means.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Harry Nutzack said:


> No shizzle??? I keep learing all kinds of things from you....
> 
> I've learned that money that is spent on guides doesn't go in the guides pocket, but rather goes to conservation and......
> 
> ...


First, you need to *learn* how to spell.

Second, why do you make things up? I never said money spent on guides doesn't go in their pockets. Stop making "shizzle" up.

I decide who I guide as much as they decide who guides them. I have turned down NUMEROUS potential clients based on conversing with them, asking them questions about what they are looking for and what their expectations are. For instance, if they said they want to "just show up and shoot" I would tell them I am not the man for the job. My hunters WILL work for their trophy every time. Money has NEVER been an issue for whether I take on a client or not. I have made some great friends that I had the privilege to spend time chasing big game with. Over a 20 year period I have met some amazing people, many I keep in contact with still today.


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

proutdoors said:


> Harry Nutzack said:
> 
> 
> > No shizzle??? I keep learing all kinds of things from you....
> ...


They simply won't ever understand pro....ignorance is bliss.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> The truth is that the tag which was used to kill spidey was available only to the aristocracy or the upper class. We all know that someone who works a relatively low paying--yet noble--job has virtually no chance of buying these coveted governor's tags. The state of Utah is setting these tags aside for the highest bidders...those of means.


I notice you continue to omit the fact that there is an identical tag issued through a draw that EVERY resident hunter in Utah can apply for and has an equal chance of drawing, regardless of their "means". Why is that? Are you being intellectually honest? Or, are you spewing half truths intentionally?


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

proutdoors said:


> wyoming2utah said:
> 
> 
> > The truth is that the tag which was used to kill spidey was available only to the aristocracy or the upper class. We all know that someone who works a relatively low paying--yet noble--job has virtually no chance of buying these coveted governor's tags. The state of Utah is setting these tags aside for the highest bidders...those of means.
> ...


That's exactly right, you'll hear nothing but "kudo's" from the Sportmans tag holders success.
Won't be a single soul crucify THAT person for getting to hunt with any weapon for 4 months!!
I'll bet no'one that's complaining thought of that one!! -_O-


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> That's esactly right, you'll hear nothing but "kudo's" from the Sportmans tag holders success.
> Won't be a single sould crucify THAT person for getting to hunt with any weapon for 4 months!!
> I'll bet no'one that's complaining thought of that one!!


Very True!!!! Its because the guy with the Sportmens tag didnt pay $100.000+ to get it and Wyo2ut wishes rich people were playing down on his level.


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

coyoteslayer said:


> > That's esactly right, you'll hear nothing but "kudo's" from the Sportmans tag holders success.
> > Won't be a single sould crucify THAT person for getting to hunt with any weapon for 4 months!!
> > I'll bet no'one that's complaining thought of that one!!
> 
> ...


All the criers over the govenors tag need to realize this is EXACTLY why the state does the Sportsmans tags. 
1 Governors tag + 1 Sportsman tag = equal opportunity.

Draw the tag, rent a Rover, take some friends to "guide" and live in a fantasy land for a few months!! :mrgreen:


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I notice you continue to omit the fact that there is an identical tag issued through a draw that EVERY resident hunter in Utah can apply for and has an equal chance of drawing, regardless of their "means". Why is that? Are you being intellectually honest? Or, are you spewing half truths intentionally?


Wait a second...you mean that governor's tag that was purchased for 170 grand wasn't only available to the rich? Any tag that is auctioned off is only available to the rich. You can't argue that...That is not half truth...that is fact. Even the rich can apply through the draw for that other tag...so they have two chances and poor guys like me only have one!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Wait a second...you mean that governor's tag that was purchased for 170 grand wasn't only available to the rich? Any tag that is auctioned off is only available to the rich. You can't argue that...That is not half truth...that is fact. Even the rich can apply through the draw for that other tag...so they have two chances and poor guys like me only have one!


Half truths again. :roll: The gentleman who purchased the Governors tag could NOT apply for the Sportsman tag, he isn't a Utah resident. So, YOU had the same number of chances as he did.  'Poor' little fella.


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

wyoming2utah said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > I notice you continue to omit the fact that there is an identical tag issued through a draw that EVERY resident hunter in Utah can apply for and has an equal chance of drawing, regardless of their "means". Why is that? Are you being intellectually honest? Or, are you spewing half truths intentionally?
> ...


Who's fault is that.....maybe i should have pursued a different career than i did, but that's MY choice and they chose theirs.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Half truths again. :roll: The gentleman who purchased the Governors tag could NOT apply for the Sportsman tag, he isn't a Utah resident. So, YOU had the same number of chances as he did.  'Poor' little fella.


Hold on...you mean my chance at drawing is equivalent to the richest guy's bid?


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Wyo2ut did you let your student out of class to celebrate "The New World Record Bull?"


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Hold on...you mean my chance at drawing is equivalent to the richest guy's bid?


Oh, I get it, it's all about the "fair" nonsense again. :roll: In some ways your chance is better. In your/my chance of drawing the Sportsman tag we have the EXACT same chance/odds of drawing. In the case of the Governor's tag Denny had to be willing/able to spend more money than EVERY other hunter on the planet was willing/able to pay for that tag. This whole "fair' argument is all about wanting what *you* haven't earned!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

> Fair and socialism have a lot in common.


Wise words from a wise man.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Harry Nutzack said:
> 
> 
> > In what ways does big money exchanging hands between Johns and Pimp's help hunting?In prostitution, Pimps at least are supposed to protect the prostitutes, however its the opposite in hunting they kill the animal.
> ...


Geeeesh, Pro, now I'm confused. This is where you said that the money exchanged between pimps (guides) and Johns (clients) goes towards habitat. You've went and changed your mind?

I can't spell? Would you teach me professor Pro? I'm sorry that my spelling is so terrible.

You've turned down multiple clients (Johns) because you assessed them verbally and found them not to fit your standards???? Impressive, most impressive but I think your full of shizzle.


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

where there no high fences and food plots. those ant fair chase.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Nice try spin weaver. My exact words:


> Money is NEEDED to buy/restore habitat, that is a FACT in today's world.


NO where in there did I say the money paid to guides goes to habitat. Any one with an IQ over 70 would know that the money paid FOR THE TAG goes to buy/restore habitat.



> You've turned down multiple clients (Johns) because you assessed them verbally and found them not to fit your standards???? Impressive, most impressive.


I have never taken on a client w/o meeting them in person. But, I believe it is very plausible to discern what kind of person you are dealing with by asking questions. If you are unable to make character judgments, I understand your mass confusion. :?


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

proutdoors said:


> Nice try spin weaver. My exact words:
> 
> 
> > Money is NEEDED to buy/restore habitat, that is a FACT in today's world.
> ...


I have never taken on a client w/o meeting them in person. But, I believe it is very plausible to discern what kind of person you are dealing with by asking questions. If you are unable to make character judgments, I understand your mass confusion. :?[/quote:2d3wotmv]

My gawd, could imagine Pro just taking on any client that calls without a little "interview"?
I'd get back into pubic general season hunting if i did that!!


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Nice try spin weaver. My exact words:
> 
> 
> > Money is NEEDED to buy/restore habitat, that is a FACT in today's world.
> ...


I have never taken on a client w/o meeting them in person. But, I believe it is very plausible to discern what kind of person you are dealing with by asking questions. If you are unable to make character judgments, I understand your mass confusion. :?[/quote:qw8cb4o6]

Who threw the first spin?

My question was:

"In what ways does big money exchanging hands between Johns and Pimp's help hunting?"

Your answer was:

"Money is NEEDED to buy/restore habitat, that is a FACT in today's world."

It's been a while, but I thought the better share of money's brought in through purchases of "tags" were dumped into the Utah general fund and little if any went back into the sport or habitat. Maybe the funds from the "governer's tag" does, but hell, I'm not so sure if it isn't deposited into the general fund as well.

As far as you (pimp) turning down clients (John's) I still think your full of shizzle.


----------



## mulepacker (Sep 11, 2007)

Pro/Everyone,

First off let me say I am not offended by nor applauding the way Spidey went down. I have said the jury is still out. When he is accepted into the record book then the jury has spoken. It won’t matter what we think, it will be decided by a group of our peers. That is good enough for me.

With that said I believe that with today’s (especially Utah’s) state of hunting that fair chase needs to be reviewed that is my opinion. I think Spidey may have a part in motivating a discussion, as have many other facets.

As far as Mr. Austad I applaud him for doing what he believes in, that is what America is about. I am glad he is not questioning my decision to chase elk on a mule. However, if enough fellow hunters questioned that right I hope it would be reviewed.



“Travis, I have to disagree with you. You SHOULD know better, I expect ignorance from these other yokels, but not from you. I can with 100% certainty say that this bull had a very good (FAIR) chance of escaping for the entire season. I would say it had a HIGHER chance of survival than the bull you harvested. Think about it, you killed a bull that's days were numbered. A bull of that caliber on that unit was doomed to a certain death. The spidey bull escaped ALL detection for weeks, and outsmarted hundreds of people during that time. Don't tell me it was 100% certain that Mossback would kill this bull this year, they're good but not that good. Otherwise this hunt would have ended September 1st, not September 30th.”

Pro,
Disagree - You gotta be kidding! Spidey is dead; I will bet whatever you want that he had 0% chance of surviving this season. You cannot argue it did not happen Spidey is Dead. I won’t disagree with you on my bull either as he is dead. Both of them are 100% on not surviving this season, so I don’t follow the reasoning that my bull had a “HIGHER chance”, other than maybe me and Bret are better hunters than everyone that pursued Spidey and therefore he died quicker. That I would agree with.

We both know that when Spidey became a target that we would have put our money on him going down. In fact I would have picked Mossback to win the superbowl before the season started. There is nothing wrong with it. There is nothing wrong with the Governor’s tag holder tagging him. 

The question is should there be stipulations on fair chase. That is not for either of us to decide but a group of our peers. 
mulepacker wroteoes the governor's tag holder have to hunt with the weapon of the season and only during the season daes? If not I think you are comparing apples to oranges, with the premium tags.
Point is, whether Denny had this tag or not, spidey would have been hunted from late July through mid November. Is that 'ethical'? Or do 'ethics' only apply to 'rich' hunters being guided? This is NOTHING more than class envy

Point had nothing to do with Denny. I was simply pointing out that the Governor’s/ Sportsman’s tags do not have the same regulations as a premium permit.

I will call the kettle black. Ignorance is not in believing there is room for improvement but having a closed mind that all is well. I believe there is room for improvement and change. Ignorance is not seeing what the mirror reflects. How many times have you climbed on someone for insulting or name-calling? Is this not hypocrisy “Travis, I have to disagree with you. You SHOULD know better, I expect ignorance from these other yokels, but not from you.” 

I disagree with you also, I think we do need to review fair chase. That does not mean that I believe or feel that any animal taken this fall does not meet the requirements of today.

I would suggest to quit arguing every post, listen you might find merit outside of your own beliefs. I know that you and skull crazy have made some very valid points that the Spidey bull was deserved.

Hopefully the rest of the concerned sportsman on this thread find value and a little wisdom in this post heaven knows we all need it.

Travis
As far as dreaming, with a little luck I will be in Mr. Austad's shoes when I am his age. So don't judge me too quick to be a have not.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

mulepacker said:


> As far as dreaming, with a little luck I will be in Mr. Austad's shoes when I am his age. So don't judge me too quick to be a have not.


I figured you are already his age. :mrgreen:

I am starting a "Ban the hunting with mule's" campaign. :shock:

You're a good steward and a quality guy Travis, I apologized for letting emotion get in the way of logic.  I agree that having issues with how this bull was harvested are legit, the stories of all the supposed illegal activities are NOT, and I should be able to keep the two separated.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

Harry Nutzack said:


> proutdoors said:
> 
> 
> > Nice try spin weaver. My exact words:
> ...


Who threw the first spin?

My question was:

"In what ways does big money exchanging hands between Johns and Pimp's help hunting?"

Your answer was:

"Money is NEEDED to buy/restore habitat, that is a FACT in today's world."

It's been a while, but I thought the better share of money's brought in through purchases of "tags" were dumped into the Utah general fund and little if any went back into the sport or habitat. Maybe the funds from the "governer's tag" does, but hell, I'm not so sure if it isn't deposited into the general fund as well.

As far as you (pimp) turning down clients (John's) I still think your full of shizzle.[/quote:3hhmvmtn]

Pro??


----------



## skull krazy (Jan 5, 2008)

As far as you (pimp) turning down clients (John's) I still think your full of shizzle.[/quote]

Pro??[/quote]

Hmmmm, i'm taking my truck in to have a little voluntary work done on it that i will undoubtedly pay for, does this mean i am considered a "john" because i am paying for a service and my mechanic is titled a "pimp"? -Ov-


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

I would dare speculate that there are a good percentage of hunters who don't even give 2 ****s about fair chase, many of whom would rather have an unfair chase and a dead critter on their wall, and get this, I bet most of them don't have a sack full of money hidden somewhere.


----------



## BPturkeys (Sep 13, 2007)

*Pro...how many guides pursuing a tropy game animal for the benifit of one customer would you say it takes to make it NOT a far chase. Would you agree that there is such a number?? 10, maybe 40, how about 500 "beaters", come on Pro, how **** many "guides" How many!!!*


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

I would say 1 per 5 acres is excessive.


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

skull krazy said:


> As far as you (pimp) turning down clients (John's) I still think your full of shizzle.
> 
> Pro??
> 
> Hmmmm, i'm taking my truck in to have a little voluntary work done on it that i will undoubtedly pay for, does this mean i am considered a "john" because i am paying for a service and my mechanic is titled a "pimp"? -Ov-


I'd say that PIMP is indeed accurate terminology for guides who offer their types of services:

Pimp
Pimp\ (p[i^]mp), n. [Cf. F. pimpant smart, sparkish; perh. akin to piper to pipe, formerly also, to excel. Cf. Pipe.] One who provides gratification for the lust of others; a procurer; a pander.

No, not in the same catagory for everyone who has a job. Not everyone is "pimping" their services.
One could also argue that it also follows very well with this definition:

A pimp (also called fleshmonger) finds and manages clients for prostitutes and engages them in prostitution in order to profit from their earnings.

@ssback and other guides etc also profit greatly from DVD's and other wares.


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

I will say this, I try every advantage that I can plausably get my hands on and feel that I am very out matched by the wiles of the Mule Deer and Rocky Mountain Elk population. Sorry for tying to get this thread back on track. Every other thread that talks about mossback has been locked, why are we trying to get this one locked? Lets say that I sold a ton of broadheads and made enough money to tuck some away for the purposes of offering a gov tag and a full guided service to the person on this sight that can win a "lets impress EPEK contest" How many of you would enter?


----------



## HOGAN (Sep 8, 2007)

I WOULD!


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

I try to impress epek, regardless of his financial situation. He's my hero.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

I know I impress epek every day.

He said he's very impressed with my body odor, hair growing ability, taxidermy prowess, the fact that I'm taller than he is, my ability to produce phlegm, my inability to hike steep mountains, and hopefully my ability to sell a billion epek XC3 broadheads this winter. :wink:


----------



## elkfromabove (Apr 20, 2008)

I could probably buy a dozen Epek broadheads. Is that impressive enough?


----------



## EPEK (Sep 11, 2007)

I didn't say it was going to be an easy contest, and the winner would be the guy that impresses me the 'most'. Everyone is at a distinct disadvantage behind Tex on the body odor thing, but do your best.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

mulepacker said:


> I believe that with today's (especially Utah's) state of hunting that fair chase needs to be reviewed that is my opinion. I think Spidey may have a part in motivating a discussion, as have many other facets.


Needs to be said again.



mulepacker said:


> As far as Mr. Austad I applaud him for doing what he believes in...
> 
> However, if enough fellow hunters questioned that right I hope it would be reviewed.


I also applaud him for tagging this magnificent animal. Like Mule, if enough people see a problem, I would hope that the issue would be reviewed.



mulepacker said:


> There is nothing wrong with the Governor's tag holder tagging him.


Again, I agree. I have no issues with the Governor's tag holder tagging him.



mulepacker said:


> The question is should there be stipulations on fair chase. That is not for either of us to decide but a group of our peers.


for some reason, there are some that haven't been able to see that the issue is about what fair chase constitutes. The issue isn't money. The issue isn't Mossback. The issue is whether or not the means to harvest these animals is being done with fair chase in mind. Is it time to take a look at the sport we love, and maybe adjust the way we pursue our game? Why is that such taboo?



mulepacker said:


> mulepacker wroteoes the governor's tag holder have to hunt with the weapon of the season and only during the season daes? If not I think you are comparing apples to oranges, with the premium tags...
> 
> Point had nothing to do with Denny. I was simply pointing out that the Governor's/ Sportsman's tags do not have the same regulations as a premium permit.


Had I had a LE Archery tag, and was pursuing Spidey, I think it would have upset me a bit to think that while I had to get within 70 yards to take a shot, another hunter could have spoiled my chances from over 500 yards away. How does this fit in to the mix? This is something that bothers me, and frankly scares me.



mulepacker said:


> *Ignorance is not in believing there is room for improvement but having a closed mind that all is well. I believe there is room for improvement and change.*


There is always room for improvements. Those who don't are truly ignorant. Hunting has changed over the course of the years, and some changes and improvements have been made. Is this enough? Should we stop now? Like Mulepacker -- I believe that there have been some significant changes to the way we hunt in the last few years, and i believe that these changes need to be addressed.


mulepacker said:


> *I think we do need to review fair chase.* That does not mean that I believe or feel that any animal taken this fall does not meet the requirements of today.


Why is this such a threatening idea? Why does this idea of reviewing what fair chase is such a scary thing for people in the guiding business? Pro, if you honestly feel that the direction our hunting is going is a good direction, why on Earth would you be against reviewing what our fair chase ethics are?

It is time to review what our hunting ethics are. It is time to take a hard look in the mirror and re-define what fair chase is. Time for a new definition.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

PBH said:


> for some reason, there are some that haven't been able to see that the issue is about what fair chase constitutes. The issue isn't money. The issue isn't Mossback. The issue is whether or not the means to harvest these animals is being done with fair chase in mind. Is it time to take a look at the sport we love, and maybe adjust the way we pursue our game? Why is that such taboo?
> 
> Apparently you haven't been reading what your bro has been posting. He HAS made money the central issue of this.
> 
> ...


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> Apparently you haven't been reading what your bro has been posting. He HAS made money the central issue of this.


Stop. Right there. I am not my brother. I never have been my brother. I can think for myself. He can think for himself. Stop trying to combine the two of us. We are different individuals who enjoy our right to think for ourselves. Stop making assumptions. Did you forget your highschool geometry lessons? When you _assume_ you make an A S S out of U and ME! I don't like being an ASS. Stop your assuming.



proutdoors said:


> I have never said/implied improvements couldn't be made.


I never said you didn't! Why on earth do you constantly have to make these issues about yourself?! Mulepacker gave you some sound advice that you should think about: "I would suggest to quit arguing every post, listen you might find merit outside of your own beliefs."



proutdoors said:


> I'm not the one who is 'scared'. *I also am not against "reviewing" what ethics are.* I just dislike the term "fair" as it is impossible to define without injecting bias.
> 
> *I disagree, I think the current 'standards' are just fine. Re-defining while likely make things worse and more restrictive. That helps hunters how?*


hmmmmm.....sounds a bit contradictory to me. It also sound to me like you are worried that if fair chase and our current 'standards' were to be reviewed, you would be restricted? So, it all boils down to that, eh? If fair chase is to be reviewed, Pro get's restricted. I guess i don't blame you for being scared...

Fair is easily defined. Google did it once for you already. Here's what Webster's has to say concerning fair: marked by impartiality and honesty : free from self-interest, prejudice, or favoritism (1): conforming with the established rules : allowed


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

> Stop. Right there. I am not my brother. I never have been my brother. I can think for myself. He can think for himself. Stop trying to combine the two of us. We are different individuals who enjoy our right to think for ourselves. Stop making assumptions. Did you forget your highschool geometry lessons? When you assume you make an A S S out of U and ME! I don't like being an ASS. Stop your assuming.


Well your very good acting like an ASS. Wyo2ut is the Victim and your the ASS. Sounds like a great team.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

No matter who is or isn't an ass, this isn't the place to point it out, so please don't.


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

Sorry Papi, he called himself one so I couldnt resist.  Sorry PBH. Carry on!!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> I disagree, I think the current 'standards' are just fine. Re-defining while likely make things worse and more restrictive. That helps hunters how?


Well, according to the Boone and Crockett club: "Recreational hunting is under attack as never before. A principle target is the image of the "unethical hunter," a person without respect for wildlife, land, or other wildlife users. In response, a major Club intent under the "Fair Chase Code" is to advocate an ethic of respect in all hunters for wildlife, land, and other users of wildlife. "

So, redefining the current standards could help us fight back against those who attack.


----------



## Treehugnhuntr (Sep 7, 2007)

coyoteslayer said:


> Sorry Papi, he called himself one so I couldnt resist.  Sorry PBH. Carry on!!


That's _gran_papi to you.


----------

