P and Y should up thier minimums
General Topic
I feel that the minimum scores for Pope and Young are too low? Does anyone else agree? I think by raising them it would only benefit the organization. I feel like it's pretty easy for a lot of people to go out and kill a p and y animal. It would make it more special if that makes sense?.
You are very lucky that the minimums are so easy for you. Up the bar and try for B&C levels with bow! That to me is the ultimate number. C
I don't care what the minimums are but I think many people would argue with your premise. It may take a guy a lifetime of bowhunting to kill a P&Y whitetail east of the Mississippi but he may have a truck load of them in the same amount of years from Iowa. In reality P&Y minimums are typically representative of a mature animal with exceptions.
I agree with Charlie. You must live in a place that has an abundance of big deer. I hunt public land, pass small bucks, and have yet to put one in the book. My largest was kept out by a broken brow tine.
And agree on B&C. Make that your goal if you feel P&Y is too easy.
bowfreak x 2
Come down to Louisiana and hunt. You'll see that it's not "easy" to go out and kill a P&Y whitetail regularly.
Why? Seriously. What's the benefit?
All that would do is lower the revenue of the club. Terrible idea.
Just enter your's that meet B&C minimums and make a donation to P&Y for 2x the entry fee for every "minimum" animal you pass on because they are too small. That would be a much more positive approach than trying to bankrupt P&Y.
I live/hunt in Illinois. I have bow hunted for 38 years, with 6 p/y bucks in the book and a handful of near misses. I have often thought how lucky I am to live where genetics and nutrition make possible to have a reasonable expectation of killing a p/y buck. That's one of the few reasons to live in this state. That said, I have only had a shot opportunity at one definite B/C buck. So shoot the buck that makes you happy. Some areas just cannot produce bucks that big. Enjoy the hunt, set realistic goals.
I'm surprised they don't lower them.
I remember once reading a column by Jim Dougherty, Hall of Fame Bowhunter, who said in all his years of hunting he had never killed a whitetail that made the minimum. That was years ago, of course, but speaks to the fact that so much depends on where you live and hunt.
Raising minimums would reduce entries, reduce new membership, reduce revenue, reduce the opportunity for hunters in many parts of the country to kill a "record book" animal. Lose-lose-lose.
BTW, they did reduce the minimum for QL caribou after the herds started to crash.
For which animals are they too low? Some areas produce large animals and some don't. Shooting a 130" whitetail in Iowa is no big deal. Shooting a 130" whitetail in some of the states in the southeast is a big deal.
Look at the entries in P&Y and then look at how many bowhunters there are!! I know a lot of folks don't enter their animals but when just success rates for killing a deer, any deer are normally 30% and lower in a lot of places, that statement just does not make sense.. Come to NY and hunt and see how many P&Y you kill. I have been bowhunting for 40 years and I have one from NY and I have access to some great hunting property. Shawn
I don't care. That is sort of a brash statement though. I don't enter animals, I rarely even measure them, and big antlers don't really motivate me the way it does a lot of guys. Different strokes for different folks, whatever makes your pecker tingle.
I do think if you take a % of the male animals killed, a much higher percentage of trophy species make the book compared to deer. But I think that makes sense given the level of effort ($) that goes into killing them. I would venture to guess the big $$$ PY members that spend more than I'll ever make in my lifetime to kill the trophy species want to see their names in the book for the money they spent and from a business perspective that justifies lower standards for those species. Do I respect these type of people as hunters? No, not really. I have tons more respect for a dink whitetail killed with a longbow than trophy animals that are reduced to status symbols and machismo for rich old white dudes.
The other aspect that really bothers me about record books and measuring animals in general is that it is NEVER an apples to apples comparison. You say it's easy to kill a P&Y animal. I say I agree, but that is highly dependent on location and life choices. I could move to Iowa and probably kill a P&Y buck every single year. Some food plot bucks there make PY at 2.5 and virtually all do by 4.5 years old. Hunting the public land, big woods of PA that I do, a 100 inch buck is legitimately something to brag about and often a 4 or 5 year old deer. Show that same buck to a guy from the Midwest and they'll laugh at you and tell you how they passed up 7 of bucks that size this season already. A P&Y buck around here is not only mature but has exceptional genes and good food sources.
If I played the draw/points game in every single state on multiple species I am sure I could accumulate a few book entries, but I choose to spend my money on other things in life and hunt more OTC opportunities, thank you very much. Those are just the choices I make and I am fine with it.
I think the measurement of animals promotes a toxic environment and should not be the primary focus of an organization that purports to represent the best interest of bowhunters everywhere.
I see what ermine is saying. If you want to increase membership, revenue and someone's chances to shoot a "record book" animal then lets lower the minimum to 100" and let the southeastern boys into the club. It's like belonging to an exclusive club where everyone with a pulse can get in. I've shot a handful of 160-175" deer not to mention a pile of smaller ones. My first bow buck at 15 met the minimum but I've never registered one. I'd be better off donating a few hundred dollars and not entering an animal if all they want is money.
They should have the female of all species measured too. Could you imagine the entries? :)
"If you want to increase membership, revenue and someone's chances to shoot a "record book" animal then lets lower the minimum to 100" and let the southeastern boys into the club." I've softly lobbied for an "Eastern Whitetail" for eons.......Not that the score would be easy to obtain but that a kid/person wouldn't have to drive,lease,or hire an outfitter to EVER see a 125" buck.My county in MS has one PY entry all time, a 126 velvet buck. 110" typical would get it.
I can't seem to get p and y candidates here in Maine. probably different in most other states.
I would argue that the club would lose a lot of revenue by upping minimums.
They already did raise the minimum on whitetails.
American elk minimums were also raised some years back, from 240 to 260.
I have been thinking alot about this topic as of late and concluded the minimums are reasonably set. Yes for some, killing a P&Y buck isn't a huge deal, for others it is a tremendous accomplishment. Some has to due with the area of the country you hunt, and the other has due to with the method or process of your hunt.
If killing a P&Y whitetail for example is too easy in Kansas, then I would suggest a hunter increase their own challenge. Abandon the feeder, the treestand, the camo, the ozonics, the scent-lock, the extended ranges enabled by the compound and get on the ground, still hunt, and get close. All of a sudden, taking that P&Y buck has a much higher degree of difficulty than before.
For me, it became more clear this season while sitting in a blind hunting a waterhold for pronghorn. I have already taken three P&Y pronghorns over the years, and I don't Need another buck to prove anything to anyone or myself. After sitting for days, pondering and waiting, I decided to up my challenge and take my recurve and begin stalking. I didn't even get close enough for a shot - yet, but I will, but it will be a greater challenge.
This is not to say that there is something wrong with other methods, just simply the realization that we can make this activity called hunting as easy or as difficult as we want. If your current pursuit is becoming too easy, up your challenge and the satisfaction of taking a P&Y animal, or any animal in some cases will be off the chart!
It is likely the reason many of us took up the bow. The rifle was too easy, so we increased the challenge. And if you really like your current method and don't want to change that, no problem, just change your personal minimums to something larger - say B&C minimums.
There is always a taller mountain and a greater challenge, look within and make decisions that please you!
Todd
I wish it was easy for me.... The minimums are generally set at mature animals for each species. If it's too easy, up the bar as some have said here. It's your hunt/challenge, nobody elses. Great ideas by Ramhunter... Ed F
Todd... I couldn't have said it better! I agree, up the challenge. The results will be much more satisfying. Great post!
Wow, I've killed a few P&Y critters and NEVER did I feel it was too easy.
For many species, I've found it much tougher to kill a female. Like Todd mentions, I've transitioned to a recurve and it has been quite humbling.
I think the P&Y mins set a good bar for a representative mature animal.
actually it will not benefit the club...........the exact opposite is true.......... as fewer entries mean fewer $35 entry fees to fund the good work of the organization.
I like where they are. I also like Ramhunter's post. I also think there should be different minimums for white tails taken in different areas, a sort of Mason-Dixon line of WTs. A 125 inch WT in the midwest is just not the same deer in Georgia or New York.
Pope and Young club aside, it wouldn't benefit those that actually hunt for the hunt and or the meat, which is where the majority of conservation dollars come from.
I don't care why anyone hunts and I like to give chase to the big boys as much as anyone but frankly I'm tired of losing access so that some can buy their place in "the book".
I like some of the points made about challenging oneself but I think most people that have an interest in putting their name in the book have little interest in more challenging hunts.
Excellent post Todd! We forget that the pope and young minimum requirements were established before all of the technology we use an education we have was available. I think the compound bow has played a huge role in making it easier to harvest a mature animal. Let me tell you I've gotten within 50 yards of dozens of mature animals, but only a handful of encounters less than 25 yards...it becomes a whole different ball game at close range. Also, consider the amount of information we have on Whitetail activity! Back in the day it was much harder to find printed information on Whitetail habits, no Bowsite of course LOL. Many novice bow hunters probably entered the woods not knowing the difference between a rub and scrape! For me, hunting mostly public land I will be tickled with my first pope and young. I've taken a few that were close but haven't quite made the book. Yes I also would agree that I need to be pickier but it has been a journey. If and when I get private access to hunting property that allows for better trophy quality I will need to up my standards. Until then I'm just enjoying the time outdoors spent with family and friends.
Raising the minimum will discourage potential new members from joining the club. You can join P&Y without having killed an animal that qualifies but why take the chance on alienating the largest pool of potential new members. Whitetails are hands down the most frequently animal in P&Y. There isn't a close second. At what minimum score do you stop for each animal?
For the most part the minimums score are just fine the way they are. The fact that we see more entry's is a sign that bowhunting is alive and well and above all that we are doing a better job managing wildlife then ever before. If your so fortunate enough to have access to game in an area that the the minimum isn't a good baseline for a trophy then impose your own higher standard for yourself.
The biggest issue the Club and quite frankly every hunting organization should be working on is increasing access, and preserving present access. Nothing is more of a threat to hunting then the limiting of access to land to hunt on.
I have only seen 3 P&Y caliber bucks while hunting nj for 42 years. One of them I got. I think they should be lowered to 115". :). Or make the score relative per state. 115" in NJ is like 145"!in Iowa.
My best buck to date after 18 years hunting in PA falls short of P&Y. Not that there aren't some nice bucks taken around here, they are just few and far between. Nature of PA hunting.
I'd say they are fine. Going on 27 years of hunting and the closest I've come is about 110" here in MA. If they changed, I'd suggest changing them "regionally". I'd bet a 100" deer here is similar to a 120 in Illinois for example. Make it relative - big being relative based on where you are.
In the end, they are relatively random thresholds and seem fine as "club" entry.
It does depend on where you live. I have friends in NE/N Central Kansas who won't even mount a deer under 150. Course they are good hunters and have access to a reservation.
Sorry never mind. Didn't mean to make people mad. Dumb question.
You realize you don't make any sense right?
OMG... Jack has become a TBM clone. :)
Is this really a concern for anyone?
If taking a P&Y is too easy, the answer is already available. Bowhunters are free to choose equipment, areas and tactics that make it harder. Aside from the fun of putting hands on a big rack, a lot of the satisfaction of trophy hunting (and most anything) comes from overcoming the obstacles and being rewarded for the time and effort it takes. We all have the choice to dial-in how we limit ourselves to where taking any animal might be a big enough challenge to create that kind of satisfaction. It might not make the cover of a magazine, but taking a cow elk with a self bow, a 9" antelope on a spot and stalk or a 124 7/8" whitetail in Iowa while still hunting might result in more adrenaline than killing a 150" rut-dumb buck as he cruises the same trail he was on in the last 10 trail cam pics.
Start using traditional equipment, then see if your view changes......
I think mule deer might be too high. Many regions I have hunted produce very few mulies that qualify.
Actually the scoring system needs to have a ceiling and you quit counting after 114
How about you set a goal for what is a trophy to you and let everything else walk except that?
125 is common in areas of the mid west, Kansa, OK, and eastern CO. Here in eastern TN, sw VA,, and many other areas it is very uncommon even with a rifle. I killed our state record many years ago, a 173" ten point. Since then I've taken another 184" and a 201" in the middle west along with numerous 125" plus and other P&Y qualifiers of other species. After 50 yrs plus of bowhunting starting out with rabbits and birds and now chasing a 140" plus here in TN with a recurve, my greatest trophy has been a sixty pound doe with a longbow and wood arrow after I had been a contractor following 9-11 and not having the opportunity to hunt for a few years. I still just hunt with a recurve and wood arrows. I have enjoyed passing deer this year and shooting fox squirrels, a rarity in this area. Now that's a trophy. The whole point is that bowhunting is not a competition with other hunters. It is a gift that some of us have been blessed with and the most important thing is "it should be fun"! Bowhunters should simply have fun and enjoy the hunt and respect the animal. If it is good enough to kill it then pay it all the respect in the world. This is what P&Y does, give honor to the animal. People twist it up by using the score as a point of competition and I don't believe Pope or Young, Compton, or Ishi would have liked it. Ishi worried about food. I was lucky enough to spend a few days with Fred Bear and he would get as excited about a doe kill as a buck. He respected both. Getting excited over big horns is understandable and no one loves targeting big whitetail more than me. I respect their rarity and their abilities to out smart everyone else to grow to what they are. There's lots of old does in the same class. The P&Y minimum gives recognition and respect to a group of animals which were smart enough to reach a point of maturity. It should stay where it is at. The second thing is that raising minimum is unfair to many portions of the nation. There will be very few 140 bucks killed in our area with a rifle let alone a bow. But perhaps the most important aspect is why should we lessen the number of hunters that enjoy the excitement of having their animal, their accomplishment, recognized by other bow hunters. It is fun and feels great when you see the final score tallied and it is awesome to open the envelope and pull out your certificate. It all boils down to my earlier point, bowhunting should be fun and show respect the animal. The more fun it is, the more people seeing bowhunters having fun and respecting the animals, the longer we will have bowhunting.
To the OP, if you could, what would you raise the minimum entry score to?
Antelope?
Elk?
MD?
WT?
Moose?
Bear?
I'm interested in your 'new' scores
Switch to traditional equipment. That is a great and very challenging idea if the minimum is too low.
ban compound entries and P&Y would mean something again
Ermine, did you inhale some interesting "smoke" while fighting fires this summer? Been a lot of weed growing on the NF these days..
;-)
Do you guys actually care that much about making the book, or officially scoring a buck? My brother and I score every deer we shoot but we also weigh every deer we shoot. Telling someone you shot a 130" buck is such a demeaning way to reduce an animal to a number. Any animal can be a trophy to people in many respects regardless of size. And just what is a 130" buck? You need more details then that to get any idea of the deer's size. Was is an old hunch backed 8pt with tons of mass, or a bare 2 1/2 yr old typical 12 with tines like pencils. To me one is a trophy buck. If you want to pay tribute to the animal then take photos, keep the rack where you can see it and remember the day, let it bring happiness to you, that is better then a small single line entry in any book.
come hunt in Michigan, especially public land and talk to me about raising them. I've been bow hunting for thirty years and only have one entered. That's hunting some pretty good private land. Just to much pressure
Cornfed that is exactly why they all score 114 to me!
What is one mans trash may be another mans treasure! aka what may not be a trophy to you may be a world class trophy to me...
If the OP hunted my 10 dpsm area he would think a fork horn was a trophy at the end of the season after seeing only a handful of deer.
You guys are all talking about whitetails. I live in Colorado and I don't have much access to whitetails so I wasn't really thinking about their score. So I guess it relative to where you live. I don't get to hunt whitetails because there's not a lot of public land to hunt them. But I've killed one whitetail here in Colorado. Spot and stalk on the ground at 17 yards. Buck scored In the 140's.
I honestly don't care about score and anything could be a trophy...I agree.
I was just talking with family the other night. Family member was discussing how truly hard it is to kill a Boone and crockett elk and mule deer. Where as p and y animals seem a lot easier. just about every 6 point elk you see scores above the p and y minimum. You arrow a 4 point mule deer and it's a p and y trophy.
No big deal. Just a question to see what others thought.
P&Y Records are for North American Big Game. Many bow hunters have to travel to some place to be able to hunt certain species and 'minimums' were set up for each species to promote 'a mature animal' of that species. These 'records & minimums' were NOT set up state by state or province. So in order for some (most) to achieve this goal they would have to travel where a animal thrives and possibly be of book recognition. ..... one can't shoot a record book animal if none live there! ..... But on that note, Mr. Fred Bear said: (I'm paraphrasing here) " no matter where one hunts and for what species, he can always hunt the poor mans trophy .... the whitetail deer" ...... I think Fred said this because the whitetail deer abound in many areas of North America, or at least a sub-species ...... "BOOK" don't make a animal a 'trophy' .... your satisfaction and quality of Your Hunt is The True Trophy! .... Enjoy & have Fun .... that is all that matters! (just my $.02 cents)
I dunno Justin, in my OTC units there are a ton of 6x bulls that don't make minimum. I've killed three of them and a 7x7 that didn't make it, passed up a ton of others, plus a couple that barely did. Same with 4x4 muleys.
I think the point guys are making is that too many variables affect antler growth from one area to another, so the Club has to establish a median baseline somewhere. Some suggest different regional minimums for whitetails. Kansas guys pass up bucks regularly that are bigger than anything some NE guys ever see in their lifetimes. The same could be said for elk in AZ and NM vs everywhere else.
Maybe your family member should try CO unit 17 with a stickbow for elk and upstate NY for whitetails and report back on how "easy" it is to kill a P&Y animal.
Ermine, that's a nice Whitetial! I've seen two of the biggest bucks of my life two years in a row coming through SE Colorado
It depends on the species, some yes I agree. IMO from a personal standpoint they set the standards slightly lower then I think is "tough", maybe 10%. That said I think it attracts attention and keeps people involved so from a business standpoint I think they got it right.
"115" in NJ is like 145"!in Iowa." Ahhhhh.... the 'Bama Algorithm handicapping system.....
"just about every 6 point elk you see scores above the p and y minimum"
Hmmmmm........ I respectfully disagree, Justin. I can't score on the hoof like others on this thread that have hunted elk for years but in the areas I hunt in Colorado I know that's not the case.
Here is a different take - how about folks stop measuring their hunts based on other people's rather arbitrary standards?
I used to religiously score the animals I killed. Then one night I found myself on a nameless mountain in the Northwest Territories reflecting on a successful hunt. My guide had injured his ankle and we had to spend the night on the mountain, miles from our sleeping bags. I had just killed a dall sheep (on my 3rd hunt), and it occurred to me how much of a shame it would be to distill the journey to a number. Especially one set by someone else.
So Matt, what did that ram score?
:-O
This 6X6 elk didn't make it and it was measured by an official measurer. And I can't figure out why some folks suggest that our measuring these animals reduces them in our eyes any regardless of their score. Maybe it would to you so maybe you shouldn't.
"And I can't figure out why some folks suggest that our measuring these animals reduces them in our eyes any regardless of their score. Maybe it would to you so maybe you shouldn't."
If the animal exceeded an arbitrary measure, would it amplify the kill in your eyes? Why?
Ermine,
Are you a member of P&Y? If you are, what type of member are you? Some guys just become a member for one year to get their name in the book and that's it. Some guys do that every time they kill a book animal. Some guys are members and never enter an animal...they are contributing more than the others for sure. The club does much more than just the record book. The club needs members, entry fees, and other fundraising money to stay alive, function, and be a voice out there for bow hunting.
I have a few species entered. Coincidentally they were all taken with a stickbow, but I've appreciated every animal and experience, bow or rifle, to the fullest for about 20 years now, say since age 28...
Anyway, more important than the animals I've entered I believe is my life membership. P&Y is the only relevant voice out there for bow hunting and we need to have a voice.
When it is all about the score, it will corrupt a hunter. Got to experience it first hand last year at a hunting camp. Maybe the guy was a d-bag anyway, who knows??
I have never thought it was too easy, but I have never entered an animal either. (I have one that would qualify.) Interesting discussion, nothing wrong with it.
"Some guys just become a member for one year to get their name in the book and that's it. Some guys do that every time they kill a book animal."
Some guys don't know that you don't have to be a member to enter an animal it seems.
I honestly think they are pretty appropriately placed for the species I have hunted, which is only a couple. For whitetail, I have yet to kill a book animal in 20 years of bowhunting my home state. Now, I'm probably no where near the upper echelon of good hunters on this site, so that factors in. I have passed some deer that would likely make book by the skin of their teeth, looking for a more mature specimen. I would tend to agree with several from above, that region definitely plays a factor in the ease of connecting on a book animal. I would go so far as to say individual land access that one has plays a big role as well. This is primarily a whitetail concern, as the pressure on most other species is generally way less, whether on public or private land.
Yeah Bou I didn't really want to advertise that and have even less going to the club. Good job though, you are smarter that everyone else, congratulations.
" If the animal exceeded an arbitrary measure, would it amplify the kill in your eyes? Why?"
Yeah, I'd have to admit it would in my case, in my eyes. I hunt axis deer which isn't even on the P&Y radar. Locally, the only real measurement we use is length of the longest main beam. It's generally accepted 30" is a "trophy" goal. Many mature bucks never get to that, like many trophy class animals, it's a case of both age AND genetics. I have several 29", 29 1/2, even a 29 7/8. No 30" deer. The King of sub-30 deer. I have passed many bucks over the last couple years that were near that mark, but likely not over it. Holding out for a 30. Kill a deer in a big bucks range and many times they change patterns, safety zones, move out... so I've passed. Shot a few meat deer in other areas they want us to clear out deer, but hunt where I know there are trophies differently. Been close several time this year, including one looong sad story, but the planets just haven't aligned.
So I DO have my sights set on a certain measurement for the most part. That's a personal goal. I see nothing wrong if someone sets personal goals, for many people that goal is a P&Y animal.
I know Ermine has personal goals as well, some pretty high standards as he's had a great degree of success with some wow animals on the ground on a pretty regular basis. I think his was an honest and valid question. Seems a good many folks have P&Y as their goal as well as having met that bar many times... should those goals be raised?
IMO, I think things are fine as they are, to raise them OFFICIALLY as a club.... I don't see where it would be any advantage or benefit to the club nor bowhunting in general to raise them. But I can certainly see how a few could raise their own personal bars and goals..... something much easier to do after having met a few others.
For some the goals are just the experience of having hunted, others is meat in the freezer. Some it's a "book" animal. A few it's a Slam of some sort (can I use a capitol "S" and not get sued?) I think in some cases they can and do change, evolve. Some cases they don't and never will. I know they even can "devolve" over time. I think everyone should have a goal before they even set foot in the woods... a PERSONAL goal. Also IMO it should never be a competition among hunters, but again, set on a personal level. What anyone else thinks of your goal should not matter.
That's the cool thing about bowhunting..... the beauty is in the bowholder......
X2 Stealthycat. Wonder how many entries there would be if guys couldn't take 40to 60 plus yard shots. If you think it's to easy to enter them change your method of taking P&Y animals, then we'll see if you still want to raise the min.
Matt,
No. The animal is the animal. The score cut-offs are arbitrary lines made by the Club. The difference of 1/8 inch making it recordable or not doesn't elevate or denigrate the animal in my eyes and I'm not alone. There are many for whom it does, but that's not everyone. FWIW, I have forkies on the wall that were special hunts so they made the wall because of the accomplishment and the experience. Likewise, I have forkies I've left in the field because of the accomplishment and the hunt. For me, the antlers are a 3D picture for me to look at and reminisce. It's about the hunt and the chase, not the bragging rights. Entering them into the book does add to the accomplishment, so they go in if they make it. There is a difference between pride and bragging. I'm not ashamed to feel pride, but I would feel ashamed to feel I was bragging. But that's not why I hunt, not why I choose the animals I choose to kill, not the reason I hang the animal on my wall, and not the reason I enter the animal in the book.
Interesting perspective. I guess I struggle separating the notion that an animal scoring well enough to make the books doesn't elevate it or denigrate it, but entering it into the book (which is predicated upon it scoring well enough to make the book, along with the fair chase component) does add to the accomplishment.
The difference between pride and bragging is subtle but important. If you distill it down, I'd say the reason I don't generally submit the animals I kill that would qualify is because I see so many guys that obviously (and some admittedly) enter animals as a proxy for the score in a game between bowhunters - and frankly I don't care to be associated with that.
"Wonder how many entries there would be if guys couldn't take 40to 60 plus yard shots"
I bet not as many as you think. Most P&Y animals I know of being killed are not even close to 40-60 yard shots.
They raised the Blacktail minimum from 90" to 95" in 2011 and I shot a 94 3/8" in 2012. I'm not sure it benefitted the P & Y club to not get my money and it won't stop me from harvesting a 90" Blacktail in the future.
Blacktail, why not just send the Club a check anyway? Would it really have mattered to enter the "last place" buck in the record book if it had been 5/8 bigger?
drum roll please.................and that question is the summation of the whole record book / financial motivation vs. name in print debate. ouch
.......................but the downside is the buck is not honored by being put in the book
Bou'bound, sorta like showing all your friends and relatives the newspaper article listing your last place finish (out of 10,000 runners) in a 5K?
Sure, you finished the race. But......
Or to tell everyone, humbly, that you shot a 168" buck (unofficial exaggerated gross raculator score) and then post on Bowsite that record keeping programs are all about ego... all day long. Ed F
Well lets see, perhaps if we take the hunters name out of the book and just leave the animal entry in we could improve it for all.
that will happen when the animals start writing the checks
"Blacktail, why not just send the Club a check anyway? Would it really have mattered to enter the "last place" buck in the record book if it had been 5/8 bigger?"
P&Y's Records page begins with with the caption "Honor the animal". If a typical Columbian blacktail with a P&Y official net score of 95 0/8" isn't worthy of honoring, doesn't that support the OP's thesis that the minimums should be higher?
And if we are going to qualify whether we honor an animal based on its score relative to P&Y minimums or the population of prior qualifiers, it appears the only purpose left for the book is "honor the hunter".
not about longer shots - its the letoff and the pure shooting ability of the modern compound
I can literally not practice for a year, pick my bow up and go hunting. That's a helluva mechanical machine that can shoot that well. Fancy sights, mechanical releases, mech broadhead .... all the bells and whistles change things too
at this point, might as well let crossbows in P&Y because they're right there with compounds for easy use
Pope & Young should realize that in todays' world things like personnel accomplishment and pride are frowned upon. Setting and reaching a goal can cause other hunters who don't set their goals as high or don't accomplish them to feel bad about themselves. P&Y should give out participation awards to everyone that bowhunts. You don't even have to kill anything. Just bowhunt one day and get a P&Y certificate and your name in the book. Welcome to the world of "everyone gets a trophy"!
KJC, oh I like that. We could even have a category for animals I saw but didn't get a shot at.
In 40+ years of hunting with bow and arrow I have never had an interest in measuring any animal...mine or others. I'm not completely negative on it and I know doing it is a big thing for a lot of guys and some clubs. I think I have just always been philosophically opposed to having my animals measured and judged by an arbitrary system of rules and people. These are good clubs and even better people, so please don't misinterpret my words. I have shot plenty of animals and in less than 30 seconds I'm asked what this one or that one would score. I don't know...don't ever want to know. I want to enjoy them purely for the thing they are, without assigning them a numerical judgment indicative of size according to a book. With a bit of luck and effort I will kill a few more nice animals in this life and I'll never know what any of them would tally up on a sheet of paper. I like it that way. My buck or bull only needs my judgment.
From a club perspective I can't see how raising the minimums would benefit P&Y. I think any club benefits from money and members, so a club which derives substantial income from entry fees would be unwise to do anything likely to interrupt or slow that.
If they wanted to honor the animal they wouldn't deduct points they would take the animal for what it's worth.
Kevin, I enter all my animals that qualify for P&Y, but I very much respect you for your attitude. It's so refreshing to see and hear from someone unconcerned at all with score.
I feel the same as Kevin Dill.
I agree with Ron and respect those like Kevin and Missouribreaks who also shoot critters with trad equipment.
The trad/Compton scoring system has always bothered me, even though some of the principals in its development are friends of mine. The idea of awarding or deducting antler points based on longbow vs recurve, treestand vs ground hunting, etc, has always seemed convoluted since none of those elements have anything to do with the antler growth of the animal. That truly does make it about the glory of the hunter and his method as much as the maturity of the animal.
I never saw any need to glorify the methods. Those are simply choices some of us make, and shouldn't be awarded a point score.
Maybe the hunter should get scored.
With all the measurement details why not give the animal credit for the effort they took to live long and avoid hunters, disease and predators?? For example deer with overall antler mass (no matter if its typical or typical, deductions- Baaaah), aging through teeth (doe entries), size and weight, also equipment type, time of year could be considered.
Also why not include small game species such as grouse, pheasants, geese? Its pretty hard to take one with a bow but have done it, know other folks who have too. Fred Bear, Arthur and Saxon did that. Fish could be entered too (weight length, girth , species). It could take a lot of directions.
Ron...thanks. I think there's plenty of room for different ideologies in the sport. I respect you and how you like the scoring aspect of P&Y. It's pretty simple in my mind. I just developed a philosophy (along the way) of purely appreciating the hunt and the animal with no desire to formally evaluate or judge it. I have friends who do it and it changes nothing amongst friends.
Lou...I'm fully with you on the Compton thing. Great organization and definitely promoting doing the hunt with traditional (by their definitions) weapons and methods. This might be a stretch for a few folks to understand: Bone is part of the animal and measuring bone gives credit to the animal. Technique and weapon has nothing to do with the animal. Crediting (score) for that is crediting the hunter. Mixing the 2 is understandable but turns it into a combo score. A big bull is a big bull to me and whatever arrow type kills him doesn't affect his value to me or my appreciation for him. I'll be first to stand up and say this flies in the face of what Compton advocates and I know it. I'm not dissenting openly with anyone's scoring system...I simply know it's their way to give credit to those who want it.
I think the entries are more about the hunter, not the animal. Almost all hunters I know talk about how many animals they have in the book, not the total score of all the animals they have entered. Terms like Grand Slam, etc are not about the animal. They are about hunter accomplishment. Also, the fact that P&Y is bow only entry makes it about the weapon and hunter, same as Compton. If not about the weapon and hunter we should have only one standard, perhaps B&C. I have a hard time believing that killing an animal to take it's man determined measurements and score,...... is about "respecting or honoring the animal".
I would be all for raising the minimum on whitetails but admittedly I am really spoiled living in Iowa here we will have 2 and a lot of 3 year old deer make net 125 easy. For me the purpose of it is to assist others in research of county or units to hunt. For whitetails I still look at the B/C book from time to time and there website but not Pope and Young. I do appreciate that both organizations have strong fair chase ethics. One of the above posters comments on participation awards that is how I view Safari Club you could shoot something in you basement or any whack-a-pet place and it goes in the book.
How about the exceptionally genetically gifted 2.5 year old buck that sports a 130" rack, but isn't very experienced yet and gets arrowed during a pre-rut frenzy where he was as dumb as a brick with lust.. Not all that difficult to kill and really only lucky to have good genetics. Yet a 6.5 year old 7 point that was past his prime, cunning and cautious, living in heavily hunted public land, only grows 118" of antler, never makes "the book".
Way too much emphasis is put on score anymore. Remove the hunters name and watch how quickly score becomes irrelevant...
I think the minimums are ok, but think the Pope and Young club should institute all time and awards levels as the Boone And Crockett has...
So no need to separate pope and young/Boone and Crockett, honor the animal.
What does " honor the animal mean" ? In many cases this was an animal in it's prime, the best herd breeder and genetics, and it was killed. I cannot comprehend this honor killing mentality. Honor is a human term, means nothing to a carcass.
What is wrong with saying " I hunt hard, do preseason scouting, practice my shots, and I am a damn good hunter. I consistently kill mature animals in their prime when they are the most difficult to outwit. Furthermore, some have measurements worthy of P&Y entry and have been documented " ?
I'm not much for "honoring the animal"..... I'll give thanks for some food. How many hogs are honored for their bacon? How many steers for their steaks? I was raised killing stuff to eat it, selling it to be killed and eaten. Humane is what I strive to be. I kill an animal I'm into getting it broken down and in a cooler. Not building a shrine to it.
WRT P&Y, it's a great organization. My understanding the documentation was initially to show numbers and how many bowhunters there were to F&G depts, to make a case for bowhunting. They still do more for bowhunting than any other org I know of.
As far as scoring..... that is going to be done club and official scoring or not. That is just man's nature.... everything around him (or about him) is and has been measured and scored from the dawn of time. As mentioned, right down to keeping scores in sporting events. As I said above... where I live there are no formal records nor an exact system to measure the axis deer. But measured they are. And all are aware of it. And a good bit of it is BS too, elastic tape measures and long armed pictures all a part. Again, human nature, not going to change it. That there is a book of record and an official way to measure and witness.... why not? Keeps things in order and honest.
I have no issues with measuring things..... or not measuring them. It is the way it is and always has been. Nobody is required to take part in it in any way shape or form (unless some size restrictions are part of your hunting regulations.... there are a good number of those, even wildlife mangers set standards it seems) A person can take part or choose not to. I don't see why it would bother anyone as to how someone else chooses to go about it one way or the other. But then again, it's clear that too is in man's nature.....
Missouribreaks I think there is a difference in the guys who shoot bows, the guys who shoot compounds and the guys who shoot crossbows. In fact, a massive difference and when P&Y allowed all the bells and whistles (especially the mechanical release and % letoff ) they watered down greatly what it means to kill a bigger than average whitetail (125 ")
If every compounder had to go back to a recurve or longbow, the realization in one year of hunting with bows instead of compounds would be eye opening to most.
So it matters .... but to me? I don't care about P&Y record book etc, I'd never enter one unless it was state or world record so they can do what they want to. Filling a tag legalls ANY method is fine and dandy too .... but recognizing the difficulty is also important.
Because of that, I doubt there will even be a higher accomplishment than Mel Johnson's buck. On the ground, in a make shift blind, recurve ... and a 204 4/8" buck? Yeah ... a bigger accomplishment than some of the greatest compound, crossbow and rifle kills and that aint a bad thing to say
But it's only about honoring the animal. :)
I don't know Mel personally, but for some reason don't feel like he would say it was a bigger accomplishment. Back then there wasn't any pressure on deer. I don't think he put an extraordinary amount of work into killing the deer. If someone killed one like that today on pressured ground, regardless of stick or wheels it would be a much bigger accomplishment, especially if he/she knew what they were hunting for. Impressive specimen, certainly, and Mel certainly deserves his kudos for making it happen.
Back then there was huge pressure on deer. Law enforcement was not what it is today, many hunted for meat with, or without a tag. Deer in many states and counties were hunted to near extinction. I remember when it was news to even see a deer track.
No doubt, deer sightings were few and far between in the '60s. However, once someone realized there was a big one around, it wasn't near the difficult hunt like it is today imo. You certainly didn't have 6 guys with trail cam pics of the buck pushing the lines and poachers coming out of the woodwork. "Poachers" back then weren't patrolling for big bucks if they were just feeding the family, unlike today where they target known big bucks. This is all second hand of course, since I wasn't around, but it seems to be fairly consistent from those who were.
When I was hunting in the 60's driving deer was common in the lake states, even with recurve hunters. When a big buck was rumored or seen crossing a road, the woodlots got pushed from one end to the other. With guns, virtually every woodlot and marsh was "pushed" for deer. Back then hunters could go about anywhere, of course hunters abused that and we have the situation of today.
