Outfitter minimum required size ?
Whitetail Deer
I was reading one of the posts in our states whitetail report card and a NR had posted the guide required a 150" minimum during the hunt. I assume it was a archery hunt, but in Missouri if you book a archery hunt that comes with a 150" minimum or better more power to ya, sure Missouri borders Iowa but this ain't Iowa. I'd like to see this outfitters kill/success rate, I will guarantee it's under 5%. I get the fact that the terms are agreed upon by both parties but isn't 150" high? Almost to the point of a scam for this state. Unless this outfitter has 2-3000 continuous acres, unlikely, the neighbors are smoking "his" deer.
Maybe he uses the special TV hunter and outfitter measuring system to determine "150". Then it wouldn't be too tough..
Seems a bit extreme but , you'll never grow 180's if you shoot the 150's. I have a friend that owns several hundred acres in NE Missouri , he's killed several bucks above that mark. Personally , I'd never do it , I like to shoot what makes me happy. Some days a basket 8 does just that and I'm happy for it.
There aren't 150s behind every tree in Iowa either. Unless your name is Lakosky or Drury, you have to look at a lot of bucks before you see one.
"Unless your name is Lakosky or Drury" LOL
How great is it that a guy willing to work his butt off all year to pay some guy with a farm(s) 2500/5000 dollars to hunt for five days and isn't allowed to shoot a nice buck, he has to shoot a 150 or bigger lol. Maybe he gets to go home with a doe for the freezer but a wallhanger?, I'd like to see the books on success. This is what horn porn has done to the hunting world, get guys so jazzed up to take a shooter buck. PT Barnum said it best lol, more power to the outfitters who can get these guys to fork up that kind of cash, they have it made. Lmoa
"Unless your name is Lakosky or Drury" LOL
"Unless your name is Lakosky or Drury" LOL
"Unless your name is Lakosky or Drury" LOL
I have no idea how I got a quad post. Sorry.
Last home brew for you Peco !!! Haaa
Iowa charges NR's $600 and a 3-5 year wait...there better be a 150" behind every tree! I get it Patdel, just seems like a tall order for a week of hunting MO.
If you go to Iowa I would hold out for 150 on public land so I see no big deal on a guides requirement as long as you know before hand.
Bob, I don't see it as people being concerned about what other hunters do so much as the honesty of outfitters. I hunt MO. In ten years I have taken one gross over 150". Out of staters may think the odds are much better than they are if they see an established minimum of 150.
Just like some outfitters will tell you to expect to see 1-9 animals a day and have a 95% success rate. It may reflect what happened in years past but not reflect what is going on today.
JMHO, thanks.
From what I seen of how deer are hunted and when they are hunted during the gun season in N. Missouri I find it hard for ANY deer to get to 150". I hunted N. Missouri twice and would find a 150" minimum a joke.
I went with Wide Rack in Ohio. He had no minimums, you shoot what makes you happy. Bu I got this.
TMBB
My bad Indiana Bob, I see I wrote "during the hunt". The 150" minimum was know by the client prior to the hunt.
Really difficult to manage herd dynamics with a bow but the gun hunters really appreciate you passing on those 145 s.
However if the outfitter is serious about doe harvest to the point of using firearms to keep them in check but is archery only for bucks,I think a 150 minimum is good.
Who cares? If you don't like it, don't go on that hunt.
How long is an outifitter gonna stay in business if only one guy in 20 kills a buck? My guess is his success ratio is better than the one you "guarantee". I'd much rather hunt with an outfit with a 150 min than something less than that. Do you know who this outfitter is?
Pat, I didn't realize that.....but it makes a lot of sense.
Its all about disclosure and diligence. If those things take place all is good amoungst the hunter and hunt provider
Pats right, and that make these outfitters even more of a scam. Think about it, you shoot a 145 and there goes another grand. It's what horn porn has done to the hunting industry, sad. I would never hunt with an outfitter who has a fine for shooting a deer, period. Could you imagine if elk outfitters did this lol.
Can't speak for all outfitters but the one that I hunt with in Iowa has a 140 minimum. He manages for an older age class deer. He wants you to kill a mature deer period and for some it's easier to score a rack on the hoof than to age a deer on the hoof.
"Who cares? If you don't like it, don't go on that hunt." I don't care because I am not looking for an outfitter whitetail hunt. But I do appreciate the heads up on this SCAM.
The fine is there for sure but a 150 min builds a culture of repeat clientele that are the foundation of successful operations
Not if they aren`t killing 160-180`s....the "minimum" is set to let you know they have a lot of quality bucks and if you`re patient you can shoot a 160 or 170. But if you don`t HAVE a lot of those giant bucks your BS will be called out and you will be OUT OF BUSINESS. Won`t take long for a hunter to get pissed when he doesn`t even SEE 120" with a 150" minimum.
They will stay in business a long time, just like some of the outfitters that have been in business a long time and get bad reviews on here. Whitetail Heaven as an example.
??? I fail to see how this is a scam. Either you like the outfitter's rules, or you don't. If you don't like this outfitter's rules then find a different one. Is it more difficult than that?
Doesn't seem deceitful or like a scam at all if it's all up front. Seems like a way to protect a business model. Would be hard to cater to top end bucks if every one of your "trophy hunting" clients came in and popped the first 120 class 8pt they saw.
What am I missing here? I don't get it; the rules are up front, nobody has to choose this outfitter, and why isn't it just an outfitter trying to up the age structure on his land?
It would be interesting to see how many hunters did or would book a hunt with Outfitters that had 150 minimums IF they were provided honest and accurate figures measuring success. My guess would be with the exception of a very exclusive Outfitters the success percentages would be in the single digits.
This is a simple case of buyer beware. Most hunters live in areas where the odds of killing a legit 150” deer are zero. Or close to it. If it’s worth it to them to raise their chances to 5%, 10%??? that’s up to them. But do your homework. Good questions to as k the outfitter and his references are how many 150s were in bow range of your clients last year? How many 150s are on the farm I will be hunting? Get trail cam pics and pictures of survivors. And know that in all likelihood, you are not going to see a 150+ on your guided hunt. You might, but do not be disappointed if you don’t. On the fine issue, many guys build in the extra $1000 before they even go so they can relax and shoot what makes them happy.
Does where Pat goes, Cimmaron, have a minimum? If so, what is it.
Steve, probably the only time I have questioned your thoughts...without a lot of acreage under their control, a let it go so it can grow philosophy has little chance IMHO. What amount do they control?
But I agree with several in that if it is up front, including actual success rates, nothing deceitful about it.
"No minimum at CRO. But in all honesty it’s not necessary. There are only 8-10 hunters all year and we all know each other. And we are all very familiar with the quality bucks there. Nobody really shoots anything under 140 there and last years average was over 180 but that’s because very few actually killed a deer. Only 3 were killed out of 8 and the scores were 215, 183, 175 gross. The buck I hit as well as Tom was likely in the 160’s and jakes was probably 155 or so." Doesn't need a minimum because he has a core group of hunters that share his goals ! I have a friend that started a hunting business and in the beginning put a minimum to achieve his goals. Now that he has been running a while he has a core group of returning hunters that share his goals he really doesn't need the rule anymore and seldom enforces it.
I agree the CRO type business model works on expansive, controlled acreage.
If that is what is happening in MO, great. I am not familiar with MO ranches as large as what exists in KS, but obviously anything is possible. Good luck!
What is it that drives guys to want to kill big antlered deer? Is it ego that propels everyone? When it sits on your wall and you look at it do you tell yourself that your a great hunter? Is it to show how good of a hunter you are to you house guests? What is it? If someone owns property, i.e.. Lee lakowsky, feeds deer year round high protein to grow big antlers, and passes on those deer until they hit the 180 mark and then shoots one, does that make him great Hunter or a great farmer? If I pass on a buck year in and year out doesn't that make that deer a dumb deer. Keeps walking into danger and the only reason he survives is that I as a hunter let him go until his antlers are big enough. Now you show me a hunter who hunts public land and takes 150 plus class animals on ado sister basis and I will give him props all day long, Stan Potts comes to mind. . It's the difference between a guy who fishes heavily pressured waters and a guy who fishes his private ponds D they consistently catch fish, whose the better fisherman?
What is it that drives guys to want to kill big antlered deer? Is it ego that propels everyone? When it sits on your wall and you look at it do you tell yourself that your a great hunter? Is it to show how good of a hunter you are to you house guests? What is it? If someone owns property, i.e.. Lee lakowsky, feeds deer year round high protein to grow big antlers, and passes on those deer until they hit the 180 mark and then shoots one, does that make him great Hunter or a great farmer? If I pass on a buck year in and year out doesn't that make that deer a dumb deer. Keeps walking into danger and the only reason he survives is that I as a hunter let him go until his antlers are big enough. Now you show me a hunter who hunts public land and takes 150 plus class animals on consistent basis and I will give him props all day long, Stan Potts comes to mind. . It's the difference between a guy who fishes heavily pressured waters and a guy who fishes his private ponds And they consistently catch fish, whose the better fisherman?
Good to know Stan Potts is consistently killing big buck on public ground
Wow the things you learn on the internet. I never knew ol “gimme a second” hunted public land.
LB, while your latter points may or may not have merit on their own, implying that ego drives killing mature bucks is just an assumption. There are people for which that is the case, but that’s not the case with everyone. Old bucks with big antlers have a mystical draw to them, and always have since the beginning of time. Maybe that’s not the case with you, but I’m not about to start insulting you with conclusions that I pulled out of thin air to determine why and how you hunt. Big bucks bring a different level of satisfaction for many hunters and it has nothing to do with ego and a lot to do with the sense of accomplishment. The animal on the wall is a 3D picture that reminds the hunter of the hunt, not something to brag to friends about.
Just because you don’t understand it and/or it’s not what motivates you, doesn’t mean that your guesses at motivation are anything close to accurate. In my experience, people who assume and try to read minds are generally wrong.
+1 Idyl.
If killing big bucks isn't for you then that's what floats your boat.
I am a meat hunter (kill fawns, yearlings and young bucks) but also take time during the rut to kill big bucks. I book my hunts around them and enjoy seeing beastly freaks.
I don't agree with minimums or wounding policies UNLESS you are going to a high end place that manages for big bucks and can produce them. Any outfitter who can't give his hunters a 75+% chance at a 150+ inch buck shouldn't have that as a minimum - otherwise you are just scamming people.
I love stan!!!! Hes not much on public land but hes not afraid to show his sensitive side!!!!!!!!
Bob,
That really is a cheap shot IMHO. How many years have they been going out, with great success? Stuff happens to all of us, if we are honest about it.
This thread is really funny. If you aren't willing to follow the outfitters minimum requirements then don't hunt with that outfit. If that really too difficult to understand. The outfitter cannot offer mature bucks that score well if all of his clients are going to drop one that is smaller just to fill their tag. If you check closely, you will find quite a few outfitters have minimum requirements for what they will let you shoot (many sheep outfitters for example).
This thread is really funny. If you aren't willing to follow the outfitters minimum requirements then don't hunt with that outfit. If that really too difficult to understand. The outfitter cannot offer mature bucks that score well if all of his clients are going to drop one that is smaller just to fill their tag. If you check closely, you will find quite a few outfitters have minimum requirements for what they will let you shoot (many sheep outfitters for example).
I used to live in north central MO and bowhunted it for at least a decade. I saw bucks that big (and bigger) EVERY year. Didn't hardly ever kill them as it was some very open country up that way. Cattle in the rolling hills, ag in the river bottoms and a lot of CRP acreage. Iowa's deer management model is better than MO (shotguns vs. rifles and outside of the rut) but don't kid yourself the deer are different. The state line is arbitrary to a deer - excellent soils on both sides of that line! Let a buck in MO get a bit of age on him and they have the potential to be impressive (Drury's were mentioned a number of times - they have some whopper MO deer on their properties). Plenty of 2.5 year olds in that part of the country will make P&Y minimums and will weigh around 220 lbs on the hoof (that is mind boggling to many that don't live in parts of the country that have deer that big). If the outfitter controls a lot of acreage he will have big deer on him if he lets them get to 4.5 plus in age - some 3.5 year olds will eclipse that 150 mark as well.
Lee
One of the reasons that Lee Lakosky kills big bucks is because myself and others hunting nearby have passed these deer for several seasons waiting for them to get that big. The big non-typical he killed this year was living on my property most of the summer and early fall. I have plenty of trail camera pics of that buck. Never got the right wind to hunt where I needed to be. Unfortunately from me, he went off my property and Lee killed him in early October. Same thing happened about 8 years ago with a B&C 10 point typical. Saw the deer twice while in stand, but too far for me to shoot with my trad bow. Lakosky killed the deer a few weeks later on adjoining property where he had permission to hunt. Both deer I had chances to shoot when they were younger but passed them as I could see their potential. Mad...no. Envious...you bet!
Pretty cool to have like minded hunters around your property, Ollie!
I would say the 150" minimum would be a hunt worth buying. Too many outfitters pillage properties and move on to greener pastures, leaving areas that require a few years to grow big ones. When I guided, I did not have these rules in place and I was shocked one morning to find my hunters from North Carolina had smoked the first two young 8 pointers that ran by.
LB, do you want to shoot big antlered deer?
It always amazes me how there are always people who feel the need to complain over what other people want or like to do. If a person wants to hold out for a certain size buck then have at it, if a person wants to shoot the first thing that walks by, and its legal, then have at that too, neither person is right or wrong.
If you don't like or agree with a minimum size, then don't hunt there, its that simple. For those who want to kill a top end whitetail, they realize that to get a few bucks to grow to that size, they need to get age and that means young bucks need to be passed on. It may not be your cup of tea but it doesn't mean that its wrong either.
The original poster said, "I'd like to see this outfitters kill/success rate, I will guarantee it's under 5%."
An outfitter with a 150 minimum and gives the hunter a 5% chance isn't realistic. I would go as far as saying it's scamming those hunters who may not be aware of that fact. I believe outfitters should have to post audited results if they are going to have such minimums. Most industries if you make a claim/or qualifier you usually have to back that up with proof.
This isn't about whether an outfitter should have the right but what should the hunter be made aware from the outfitter. Like I said, I think if it's any less than 75% opportunity then you shouldn't have the minimum.
Idyllwildarcher, I was simply asking questions. I don't believe I accused anyone of anything, just questions.
12yards, not important to me. I consider myself a equal opportunity shooter, yearling, spike, doe or buck doesn't matter. What matters to me is putting some great tasting meat in the freezer. My largest buck is just shy of 140 and he just happened to walk by. I have had 150/160 class deer in my zone and just didn't get it done for one reason or another. A trophy deer in today's deer woods certainly does not have the same mystic as a deer years ago, nowadays, growing big antlers is the rage.
What kills me is people whining about people having a CONVERSATION about a certain topic. NOBODY has told anyone what they should do or don`t do. Just because someone doesn`t agree with YOUR point of view doesn`t mean the topic can`t be discussed.
That`s all this is....a discussion. I thought that was the point of a "Forum".
LB, you have one shot. A 150 class is standing in a field next to a forkhorn. Which one do you shoot if both are giving you the opportunity. I'm seriously curious??
You're either kidding or clueless LB! You question a guys motive if he hopes to take a big buck but you have great respect for Stan Potts? You're just effing with us, right? You think a big mature buck is dumb because guys practicing QDM passed him? Really? How about the notion that some hunters love the challenge of trying to take a big, mature deer? Believe it or not, there actually are guys out there that have killed some "good" bucks and have self-imposed minimums because they embrace the challenge of killing a bigger one and not because they are egomaniacs or braggarts. How about the natural beauty and awesomeness of a big set of antlers is why some guys want to put them on their walls? Is a guy that "grows" a big deer a good hunter or a good farmer? How about both! Hey, I agree there are a whole lot of guys out there chasing animals for the wrong reasons (Spann, Brackett, Busbice to name a few). But slamming Lee Lakosky and praising Stan Potts in the same post is just hilarious. Believe me, there are plenty of ethical, hard working bowhunters out there trying to kill a big buck for the right reasons. Why all the cynicism?
"Steve, probably the only time I have questioned your thoughts..." Haha,maybe you should more often! Naturally a 150 " minimum will only work if 1. you have the land amount and/or 2. great soil and genetics.Thats the typical oxygen required but the lack of pressure is the key taking them
I hope EVERYONE booking a whitetail hunt IN A HISTORICALLY GREAT STATE and are getting aerial maps combined with total hunter booked numbers and do a pressure evaluation.The ratio of timber/days afield can reveal lots of OVERHUNTED outfits that have little to low chance of getting YOU on a 150+
Saying all that,Missouri would be a tough State to legitimately be able to justify the 150 minimum
The question to ask outfitters is not the success rate on killing a 150"+ buck, it is how many you will see in a typical hunt. Thornton, you have to realize that the boys from NC have probably never seen a 120" buck in their home state so anything even close to that looks mighty big to them. I know, because I used to live there and in 12 years of hard hunting I only saw one buck that would score over 100".
Don't kid yourself Ollie. NC is a sleeper state for BIG horned bucks. Peanuts, tobacco, wheat, corn, beans, as far as the eye can see. Broken up by thick tangled cut over, woodlots, and swamps. It is big whitetail heaven. Don't get caught up in the "Book" entries either. It just isn't a big thing down there. The locals from Winston Salem east smile to themselves every time somebody says something like that on the internet.
OK Steve, understand what you meant. I see smaller properties in MO and with gun in the rut... Though, 3 over 150 came off of adjacent properties to my 120 this year, including an over 180 gross. But, most of the bordering guys are horn hunters.
MO does place more in the books than KS because of herd size.
Wow, questions being asked and panties are all bunched up. Bustaribs, I didn't slam Lee lakowsky, I've met him and he seems like a good guy, he was used as an example. Isn't the busbices and the spanns and brackets of the hunting world the problem with horn porn? Isn't Horn porn the reason outfitters like the recently busted Hadley creek exsist? How many other outfitters are out there secretly baiting in order to build a photo log of clients with 150 plus deer. The horn porn is out of control and it's hurting our community, and until we as hunters wake up it's going to bite us right in the arse.
I don't know the name of the outfitter. The review is in the State Grade section. From the ones I know of they tend to run with many farms leased miles apart, most under 250 acres each. Point being Missouri has a rifle season in the peak rut and its a two buck state, one rifle/one bow, the majority of the bucks taken are under 3.5. Do they have a chance at a 150" sure, the odds are against them here.
I hunted with an outfitter in Missouri back in 09. Of the 20 guys they had in camp that week 2 bucks were shot that broke 150. Both came off the same property that had a hot doe on it that day.
The one thing I am curious about with such a high minimum score requirement. What about the 135” 5.5 year old buck? Chances of him making it to 150 are slim to none. Not all bucks grow big racks. Bill Winke’s show proves that and he is in Iowa.
Know less than nothing about any of this. Up to any business to set their rules and requirements right up front. But if some outfit does set some kind of minimum....... I would thing it prudent to have 5 or 10 references and thoroughly check it out. Anybody can set "minimums"..... realistic OPPORTUNITY at those minimums would need a thorough scouring, er, "study"..... more power to them if they can consistently provide such..... but can only imagine the number of outfits who have only the barest evidence of a handful of such animals (or fewer) and use it as an advertising ploy.
I'd think an operation with such quality would have few "openings" in any kind of short term booking but for "standby"..... heheheheh.... "standby" is another thread......
Genesis....... I'm thinkin' maybe Alabama and their sliding scale handicap scoring system might work in a lot of places...... =D
We have a reciprocal agreement with those guys for sure!!!
"Don't kid yourself Ollie. NC is a sleeper state for BIG horned bucks. Peanuts, tobacco, wheat, corn, beans, as far as the eye can see. Broken up by thick tangled cut over, woodlots, and swamps. It is big whitetail heaven"
Like I said, I lived and hunted there from 1988-2001. I could not disagree with you more. Have you actually hunted in NC? Yes, they take some nice bucks in south Virginia and in West Virginia, but decent bucks in NC are few and far between. Most of the biggest bucks are taken out of city sanctuaries where gun hunting is not permitted. They have lots of food down east but the local hunters don't pass much so very few deer get a chance to grow to a decent age/size. I still have friends that live and hunt in NC and they are not killing anything over 100" and these are good hunters who have lived and hunted there their entire life.
I'd love to hear how horn porn is killing us as hunters and see some actual proof. Mostly it's a threat to old traditions and those who don't want to see them change. Better buck management is not a threat to hunting.
Ollie. NW NC produces giant deer regularly. My builder showed me bucks each year he killed all ranging from 140-170+. NW NC is a sleeper area. The lease I was on we killed 3-4 bucks every year in the 120-140 range. They are there unless you live in eastern NC where they just don't get as big.
Michael: Your story is exactly what I was talking about. 10% success with a minimum is just not acceptable and a scam. That number has to be 75% for opportunity and 50+% for success before it becomes viable. Now if the outfitter had a 50% back then maybe.
12 yards, easy, lower and lower Hunter participation numbers each year. disenchanted with not seeing in the woods what they see on tv.
Exactly Pat! A $1,700 hunt is going to run 21 hunters and have a size restriction? Really?
I just think hunters need to start demanding certain requirements when booking hunts that have a wounding or size minimum policy. They may be reasonable requests but the guide has got to also do his part.
On size restrictions, annual reports that have the outfits average score and est. age would be ideal.
On wounding, guide has to have a tracking dog (where legal) and put as much time as the hunter is willing to search. Also, if deer is seen again on trailcams and looks healthy hunter should be able to hunt again or pay a fine to continue to hunt.
The answer is simple, do not hire an outfitter with such policies.
So do you guys want to be controlled by big government? China? Russia? Seems like a lot of jealous people here. If an outfitter says, "Pay me 5 million dollars if you shoot a buck small than 150 inches" and Warren Buffet agrees to it...whats the issue? Just a bunch of sour grape entitled people wanting big government to tell them how to behave. Wow...
This problem is easy to solve. A property owner has a $50,000 mortgage payment for his hunting land. Why dont the people complaining he charges too much for hunting right just donate $45,000 to the property owner so he doesn't have to sell hunts? But then...how is he going to eat? FREE MARKET. I don't hear people complaining about doctors charging $500 an hour or lawyers charging $300 an hour or bulldozer operators charging $100 an hour...or lawn mowing services charging $50 an hour. Hell, why not convert this country to SOCIALISM right now. Tell me not to drink 50 ounce sodas...not to smoke...not to drive (dangerous)...don't breath the air...and don't drive a car (global warming). Let's cut to the chase... do we all David Koresh ourselves?
You'd think we're talking about Starbucks needing to be regulated on how how their coffee is. Snow flake bow hunters? My God...what is this country coming to.
Maybe I read this wrong...did an outfitter lie? Or did an outfitter create some false advertising? THE EXAMPLE WAS "HOW DARE AN OUTFITTER HAVE A MINIMUM BUCK SIZE RULE AND NOT HAVE 75% SUCCESS RATES"! And people agreed. Don't we want THE ENTIRE WORLD TO HAVE A MINIMUM BUCK SIZE RULE????? Now if outfitters are advertising a 30% success rate and it's really a 5% success rate...I have an issue with that. People who can afford $4,000 hunts probably 1/9th of them are attorneys. And all the rest have money to hire an attorney. Wait let me think, Outfitters aren't stupid either and I bet they don't advertise such flawed data or lies.
In my area a 150 minimum would be a bad idea. A three year old 150 is not the buck you want to be shooting as he has not even come close to reaching peak size. Once he is 4 or 5 and only 150 he is less likely to be a true giant. We try to shoot 4 year old or older and we acknowledge that some of the 4 year olds shouldn’t be shot either but due to being on a smaller farm we can’t manage them as tight as you could with a 1000 acres. If you book a hunt knowing the rules you can’t bitch about it .
This is a topic I wrestle with all the time trying to find a balance to manage hunters expectation and managing the resource. One word not used enough is mature. I am in Iowa and view a mature deer as 5 or older. Ideally the minunium would be based on age, because deer don’t have birth certificates this can be a hard call to make. Any guide that has strict minimums should have trail cams pics to show the mature bucks on the farm and the immature bucks you will be expected to pass up. This should Include bucks that may not make the size minimum but are shooters by age. My fine system for bucks taken that are immature and below our minimum has changed it is still the monetary fine but the new part of the penalty is these hunters will not be allowed back ,Never. There are a lot easier ways to make money and I plan to spend my time with like minded people that enjoy the opportunity to hunt mature deer. Also would like to hear what the above mentioned wound policy is at CRO that is another subject I wrestle with.
The guys who are commenting abut Stan Potts are really clueless. He killed 3 200" bucks long before he became famous and actually that is why the Druries pursued him to pick his brain and learn a few things. He may be a pimp now but he knows more about killing big deer then 99% of the people on this forum who think they are big deer killers. 150" minimum to me is asking a bit much ecsp. in Missouri but if you know going in you can complain. I myself would not book with the guy but as I said if they are upfront about it then so be it. I believe old Stan was the first man to ever kill 3-200" bucks with a bow and their are only a handful who have done it since. Shawn
Would I shoot that buck, in a heart beat. To pay 9k for a deer let alone 30k is ridiculous. Nowadays the big rack buck is what most are after to show that they are a great Hunter, this is what horn porn has done to hunting. Those Canada prices are going up and most likely the rest of good deer country hunts will be to. The dnr in Illinois is taking the herd down and shooting any deer that shows up so the future hunting is going to be tough in the future years.you all think Hunter participation numbers are low now just wait.
I have no problem hunting with a 150 minimum. That’s the only reason I’ll be hunting Iowa this year. I killed 8 Deer in Maryland last year. Both my archery bucks were over 130. That being said I am not hunting with a guide this fall in Iowa. Just have no interest in guided hunts. Not for whitetail that is
Lb shooter- Stan Potts does not consistently take 150 inch deer and he definitely does not take them on public.
Stan Potts wasn't always a tv Hunter celeb, he got to be due to his track record at taking big deer mostly off public land. Now that he is a celeb in the hunting world he is demonized and hated by jealous Hunters, fine. Does he amp it up on film a bit to much , probably, but the guy knows how to hunt big bucks.
www.gameandfishmag.com/.../mw/deer-hunting-legend-stan-potts Well this article shows a couple of his 200 inch deer and some other very nice deer way before he became a tv Hunter.
Indiana_Bob, since you are such an authority on Stan Potts and are always degrading other bowhunters let's see your 200" bucks?
That's like me saying I can throw just like Tom Brady, I just choose not to. Got to love guys who run down other bowhunters and can't back up crap. Carry on.
Well how did he shoot his buck on ritz property?
Bob, are you saying Mr.Potts shot this deer inside a high fence? Or did he do something illegal? If not then congrats to him or anyone who takes a wild 200” deer. Or perhaps you mean the deer was tame?
I see it as the outfitter wants a good reputation as a trophy hunt. It makes the outfitter less desirable if all he shows is small bucks. When I guided, I was always very disapointed when my hunters shot the first small buck that stepped out.
Stan was mainly hunting private ground in his early years but did hunt the Clinton lake special area when it opened. I will acknowledge that once he became a tv hunter he is required to shoot the first decent buck that shows up. In regards to how many 200 inch deer does somebody have? Unless you are hunting a particular 200 inch buck and passing all others it is just luck when you shoot one. Any four year old Illinois buck with the proper genetics could score 200 therefor the skill is shooting the mature buck and the luck is it had the genetics to score over 200. This brings me back to the original point of this thread. With a 150 minimum, if its only a three year old it is absolutely the wrong buck to be shooting because that buck had the genetics to be the real gagger in a year or two.
"I know exactly how he shot his 200” on Joel’s property. Wonder if Joel and Greg Ritz have paid their fines yet to Kentucky for all their violations.." One post you say you know how he shot a buck, the next post you don't know? So if Stan Potts paid to hunt a property , isn't that what you do when you go on an outfitted hunt? Doesn't make a lot of sense. You either know or you don't, but I would wait til you know 100 % before you go calling some guy a bum. When you say someone,had a buck locked down, does that mean he had him in a pen?
Have a old friend that is a long time taxidermist in Ia., when I stop in usually after the gun season he has a room full of antlers to be done and there are not many over 150, but he had a 180+ hanging to be done. Like he state the eyeballs get bigger with the antlers when in the field than when drug in the shed. He has done some that were pin raised and claimed as wild that were over 160s, as you see on the TV.
Ritz is a trespasser. He got thrown off a piece in Indiana a few years back that he didn’t have permission to be on
I bet herm has some thoughts on Stan from the glory days
Indiana Bob, you stated you know how he shot his buck on Joel's property, I asked how did he do it?
Wow so it was patterned, I've never had a deer walk out from where I thought it would. Give me a break lol
youch. It’s officially the off-season
I feel like prior to forums guys would have to get together and b*tch with their buddies in a garage with a whiskey and that way it wouldn’t be on the internet forever.
All of you guys must really not have a clue!! Stan Potts killed the 200" giants that I am talking about before anyone knew who was. He was no celebrity and was just a guy who new alot more about deer hunting then most if not all the folks on here. I am going back to the 80"s and maybe into the early 90"s. I am not speaking of any of the deer he has killed in the last 15 years or. I am talking before all this hunting show BS!! Really ought to have a clue before ya post about stuff you know nothing about!! Now I agree it is all about the hunting shows and the privately managed property but again there was a time he did it all and on his own!! Shawn
I am pretty sure his first was in 1983 and grossed over 200"s and netted like 194 as a typical. up to that point he had killed a couple good bucks one being a 160" deer or so. Shawn
My original point was exactly what you said Shawn. Bob is appearenatly quite jealous of Potts. Still waiting Bob for you to post up your 200 inch bucks. Your making accusations that Potts killed a penned buck on the ritz property without any proof. Give credit where credit is due, Potts is/was a very good Hunter and which led him into the television hunting arena. Three 200 inch deer to his credit, but I guess your going to claim he cheated on killing each of them. Lol
lil' green monster raising it's head it sounds like
I never said he killed them on public, read my posts. Never, don't think I implied it either. Just the fact he was at one time a guy who worked for killing his deer, not much anymore but expect he would still do ok if he had to DIY it on public or private. Shawn
Bob you seem to know it all. Wish I were as smart as you ;-)
Still waiting to see your 200 inch deer Bob. How about a 190?
Wow nice deer, how do we know they didn't walk right out in front if you? Guided hunts? Muzzle loader/ rifle? How do we know you didn't go bonkers after the shot and ask for a second? Still many questions unanswered here Bob.
Bob you sure of that last statement?? As I said you should really know of what you speak as least have a clue! Shawn
I can't believe I'm gonna say this............................but I agree with Bou' bound! ;-)
I am far from being a Stan Potts fan , but
You keep eluding to Stan Potts in some kind violation or not being truthful......If you got it, lets hear it.
You keep making the statements and the claims...back it up..If the deer wasnt patterned in ohio , what was it? pen raised? There can only be 1 right answer.
Bob, I meant the post about where you said not being an idiot. That is what i was referring to not your other nonsense. Shawn
I worked for Gene Wensel the last year he had the "Classic Whitetails" tour. I remember Stan Potts coming to one of his shows in Illinois that spring and waited around wanting to talk to Gene after the show. I was a 19 year old kid and had every issue of North American Whitetail committed to memory..........so I knew who Stan was. He WAS NOT famous at the time in the early 90's. He had ONE article written about the big typical that grossed 200 he'd killed. He'd actually killed two legal bucks in Illinois that year out of he and his partners honey hole so to speak. One was 140's and the other was the 190's net typical which he sold to a collector by the way and got a repo and the cash for it.
Indiana-Bob is right at least partly in that Stan and his then hunting partner had exclusive access to a little spot that butted up to the Clinton Lake refuge. It was a "kid in a candy store" spot that only lasted so long. When I lived in Kansas I had access to a spot that butted up to a boy scout park and another to a refuge that were phenomenal during the rut. It doesn't make someone a great hunter necessarily.........very good recognizing what you have access to.
As Gene Wensel used to say, "How you hunt is not nearly as important as where you hunt."
Anyone that has exclusive access to undisturbed deer through leasing or private farms or hunting near a refuge etc......has a leg up on everyone else pure and simple. I killed a few giants on my "secret spots" too while it lasted.
Indiana Bob, you are right on about Stan Potts, but I didn’t no him when he started bow hunting. I figure he was a good hunter then but he has change 100% . I guided him and I call him a shooter . Lol he is alittle out there. As for the 200 he shot on Joel’s you are 80% correct. The farm he killed it on had two other hunters hunting that buck and had close encounters with it. Joel also sat other clients in there but they never got a look at him. He did call him when it showed up again. As for being a true 200 I don’t think it scored that from what the Taxidermy told me. He said it was high 190 but not 200. Stan told everyone it did. Again just hear say. I know Joel has had other non TV hunters he has put on 200 class deer and they killed them. Guess what I’m saying is to me a good guide should being trying to do this. I’ve had it done for me a couple times . One was a Elk and one was a whitetail. Still took me all week to get it done but they had them patterned when I got there. Again as for Stan he is just another TV guy that has changed and I consider a shooter not a hunter. So many of them on TV any more. I’m like you don’t watch it much anymore. Don’t get me wrong there are still some good ones.
This whole post is bullshit bunch of guys with money bitchin about each others idea of hunting which it dosent sound like hardly any of you do. Buying deer hell id rather shoot a100 incher than pay to hunt
Liktobowhnt-is buying your own property considered paying to hunt?
No steve i dont feel anything is wrong with buying land or even using outfiters i really dont care. What gets me is all the people who want to brag about killing huge deer they paid to kill. NOT HUNT
Basically what we've learned is someone here doesn't like Stan Potts
I dont even know who the hell stan potts is DONT CARE i dont watch tv hunting shows. Fake news haha
As Gene Wensel used to say, "How you hunt is not nearly as important as where you hunt."
So true, especially if you are hunting for score.
Shawn- his 83 buck netted 190 5/8 but that wasn’t big enough so Stan made the nontypical point on the end of the beam typical which increased the score to 195 5/8
As someone used to say, "How you hunt is not nearly as important as how a bunch of strangers on the internet think about how you hunt."
