Michigan Sportsman Forum banner
101 - 120 of 138 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,124 Posts
They aren't telling you how to hunt, just the rules for inclusion....nothing to do with state rules.
That's true. What's also true is them publishing their support for raising the ethical bar based on "hunter opinions" readily lends itself to public and public agency consumption/use. If that proves insufficient, model legislation is developed and shared with same for consideration/action.

What kind of message does it send when by most accounts, one of, if not The most respected pro hunting organizations, feels that hunters are currently engaged in unacceptable, unethical pursuit?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
414 Posts
What about Cuddelinks? They send pics to a home camera that you physically have to go to, grab the card, and preview the pics. They don't use cell service or send directly to your phone, but you don't have to walk to each and every camera in the woods.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
What about Cuddelinks? They send pics to a home camera that you physically have to go to, grab the card, and preview the pics. They don't use cell service or send directly to your phone, but you don't have to walk to each and every camera in the woods.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app
Probably depends on the exact working of their new statutes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
864 Posts
Maybe they are trying to get ahead of the fact that technology grows at an exponential rate. Therefore if unchecked it stands to reason that what we consider hunting and fair chase now would look completely different in the years to come and not necessarily in a good way.


Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman mobile app
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,372 Posts
I agree. Total inches of antler. To this day I have never figured out why a rack is penalized for how god created it.


Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman
There’s no penalty, certain racks go in certain categories, pretty simple.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,372 Posts
And B&C or anyone else for that matter, would know you run cameras how?? If I didn’t want you to know that I run cameras, you wouldn’t know.


Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman
Trust me, one of your jealous friends, or someone that knows someone will turn you in.

If you‘re willing to sign the fair chase statement when you enter it, knowing it was illegal, then only you know and have to live with with entering an illegal animal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,372 Posts
I will follow the rules of the state that I hunt in, not the exaggerated rules from B&C. I can't understand why the state's fish and game department rules aren't good/strict enough. Whatever, I doubt I'll shoot a record buck anytime soon.
Then you and a bunch of others in this thread will never have to worry about it, but then I bet there’s a whole bunch of people in this thread, if they were lucky enough to kill a B&C buck, would be really disappointed if they couldn’t enter it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,372 Posts
Maybe they are trying to get ahead of the fact that technology grows at an exponential rate. Therefore if unchecked it stands to reason that what we consider hunting and fair chase now would look completely different in the years to come and not necessarily in a good way.


Sent from my iPhone using Michigan Sportsman mobile app
I think this is exactly their reasoning for doing this, to get ahead of technology. I wouldn’t want to have to be the one at B&C making this decision, but I certainly understand the reasoning behind it.

Should it be legal to hunt with drones, should it be illegal to mount a firearm on a drone and use it to kill an animal? May sound a little silly, but if it isn’t written down in a law, or in B&C case as a reason to disallow an entry, then you know someone will attempt it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,835 Posts
Then you and a bunch of others in this thread will never have to worry about it, but then I bet there’s a whole bunch of people in this thread, if they were lucky enough to kill a B&C buck, would be really disappointed if they couldn’t enter it.
It's the fact that they allow Baiting and deer drives but don't allow cell cameras that makes me lose their reasoning. If someone is shooting an animal based on the states regulations then it should be allowed into the books.

The new rifles are way more accurate than a 1950s weapon, archery equipment has gone off the charts, binoculars and spotting scopes have come a long way. Where and when do they draw the line? Are they not into an ethical kill like a scope/rangefinder provides? Should we all go back to chucking spears?

I also have chased a B&C buck each of the last 3 years but I wouldn't know it unless I had cell cameras.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,372 Posts
It's the fact that they allow Baiting and deer drives but don't allow cell cameras that makes me lose their reasoning. If someone is shooting an animal based on the states regulations then it should be allowed into the books.

The new rifles are way more accurate than a 1950s weapon, archery equipment has gone off the charts, binoculars and spotting scopes have come a long way. Where and when do they draw the line? Are they not into an ethical kill like a scope/rangefinder provides? Should we all go back to chucking spears?

I also have chased a B&C buck each of the last 3 years but I wouldn't know it unless I had cell cameras.
I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying, but where should the line be drawn? Should we allow drones with a firearm that can be fired remotely? Silly maybe, but you know someone would create such a weapon if they could and it wasn’t banned.

One of the things B&C has always demanded is an animal be harvested by fair chase methods and you must sign a statement to that effect when you apply for entry of an animal.

They’re in the unenviable position of being damned if they do, damned if they don’t.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,372 Posts
Q
Might sound simple but racks get penalized for not being symmetrical. Even NT racks get penalized.
The system is what it is, at the time the system was developed the thought was to try to identify the most perfect of the species and the current method of measuring was their answer. If a new scoring system was developed today, would it be different, probably, but there’s that group that would never participate in the system anyway, so what’s the point of changing it for some of them.

Consider they’re are other methods of scoring animals that have been developed, but they haven’t been supported by hunters where B&C and P&Y are still the standards to measure your harvest against.

My guess the idea of putting your antlers in a bucket of some liquid and somehow determining the cubic inches would be the least supported and the most ridiculed.

Also, while it’s true there are deductions for both typical and non typical whitetails, the abnormals are added back to the final score for non typicals. And for those advocates who want to see the animal given credit for all the antler it grew, I’ve talked to very few that agree with dropping the inside spread measurement because it’s not a measurement of antler, it’s a measurement of air.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,835 Posts
I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying, but where should the line be drawn? Should we allow drones with a firearm that can be fired remotely? Silly maybe, but you know someone would create such a weapon if they could and it wasn’t banned.

One of the things B&C has always demanded is an animal be harvested by fair chase methods and you must sign a statement to that effect when you apply for entry of an animal.

They’re in the unenviable position of being damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

I also get your point but a drone with a gun wouldn't be legal in any state that I know of, then again I haven't hunted all of them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,105 Posts
Q


The system is what it is, at the time the system was developed the thought was to try to identify the most perfect of the species and the current method of measuring was their answer. If a new scoring system was developed today, would it be different, probably, but there’s that group that would never participate in the system anyway, so what’s the point of changing it for some of them.

Consider they’re are other methods of scoring animals that have been developed, but they haven’t been supported by hunters where B&C and P&Y are still the standards to measure your harvest against.

My guess the idea of putting your antlers in a bucket of some liquid and somehow determining the cubic inches would be the least supported and the most ridiculed.

Also, while it’s true there are deductions for both typical and non typical whitetails, the abnormals are added back to the final score for non typicals. And for those advocates who want to see the animal given credit for all the antler it grew, I’ve talked to very few that agree with dropping the inside spread measurement because it’s not a measurement of antler, it’s a measurement of air.
Non typicals have deductions. They add abnormals but penalize the difference in typical part.

There's a lot to talk about concerning how they should be scored, but the poster's point was they penalize/deduct part of what god created. You said they don't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,372 Posts
I also get your point but a drone with a gun wouldn't be legal in any state that I know of, then again I haven't hunted all of them.
Yeah, I was being a bit facetious, but you get the idea. If someone can think of a better way, even though it’s a bit sketchy and hasn’t been banned, then chances are someone will do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,372 Posts
Non typicals have deductions. They add abnormals but penalize the difference in typical part.

There's a lot to talk about concerning how they should be scored, but the poster's point was they penalize/deduct part of what god created. You said they don't.
No, I didn’t say that, I said abnormals, meaning abnormal points, are added back, not side to side differences.

Inside spread isn’t a god given antler measurement, but it’s added in the score. I’m a measurer and I’d say in 90% plus of the antlers I measure inside spread exceeds side to side deductions, so the overall score in the end benefits more than if antlers alone were measured.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,344 Posts
Spread is overrated, as they say. But at the same time, it is a major characteristic of a rack.
 
101 - 120 of 138 Posts
Top