Amercan Hunter story on "Trophy Hunters"

[Colorado Cowboy]

The story entitled "We are Trophy Hunters" n the latest February issue really got my blood boiling. The author Joe Coogan obviously has lots of Africa hunting ties. His whole story never once mentions the aspect of killing a game animal for eating purposes. All he talks about is horns, claws & skin. For me he does a disservice for hunters. Certainly it does not classify me a trophy hunter as he defines hunters.

I intend on writing a letter to the editor of American Hunter and express my views...............

 

[ScottR]

I probably need to read this.

 

[BuzzH]

What was the intent of the article?

Judging from the title, maybe his defense of trophy hunting?

Context matters...way before outrage.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

What was the intent of the article?.

Read it and find out for yourself. Then you can make your own judgment.

 

[BuzzH]

People hunt for all kinds of reasons, including trophies.

 

[Prerylyon]

Each of us is entitled to our opinions, but, I feel the hunting community is under such attack that we need to find common ground as much as possible.

Personally, I lean more towards the meat hunter camp, with a definite tolerance and interest in the legal hunting of trophy animals: meat, ivory, antlers, hide, fur and all.

Idk. Its like anything I guess. I'm into many hobbies, but (and maybe saying this will get me into hot water) I often come across folks in my hobbies that are just plain too fanatical about their heirloom tomato seeds, or bread baking-just as an example-to my liking. Hunting also falls in there. I might not agree with their fanaticism, and, some of what they say in a magazine or TV show might even put me off. I'm not saying anyone has to like anything, and not saying at all that bad hunters should be defended-but what is a 'good' or 'bad hunter' may mean different things.

To some extent, and I cannot fact check this-just what I have seen in some non-hunting publications-trophy hunting in Africa has been shown to be not only beneficial to animal management-but also financially beneficial to some areas where the local population works as guides, trackers, and in the hospitality industries associated with safari hunting.

Its hard to avoid anything becoming political anymore.

I guess I get where you're going with this. Publications can be ambassadors for the sport, they can make positive differences through their wide audience.

Regards,

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337Z using Tapatalk

 

[Ikeepitcold]

Interesting but I would bet that most of us are going to see it the same way as you CC. I’ll have to find this article and read it.

 

[CrimsonArrow]

Outside of predator control, it has to be about the meat for me. I want a big rack on the wall as much as anyone, but if I had to choose between antlers or meat, I would take meat. Not too impressed by guys who shoot a lot of trophy animals every year, but give away the meat. I don't condemn that, as long as it gets eaten, but we evolved into hunters for the meat, not for the trophy. Meat hunting is also a much easier sell to the non-hunting public.

 

[kidoggy]

haven't gotten that issue yet . will have to give it a look when I do.

 

[HuskyMusky]

Haven't read it but agree, every time we mention trophy hunting, we should state that "trophy hunting is meat hunting!"

 

[Work2hunt]

I just read this article and it got my blood going a little, too. I support everyone's opinion to hunt how they want, legally. But, I was raised that if I'm killing something it better be for meat, fur, or nuisance control. Horns or antlers are just a bonus.

 

[JimP]

OK, I just got done reading the article. And while it does focus more on just the horns or head of the animal and doesn't really mention the taking of a animal for the meat I believe that was the purpose of the article, to get you to thinking about the "trophy" part of the hunt.

In the article he mentions the taking of a animal that was smaller than another one that had been shot, yet the hunter considered the smaller animal the greater trophy.

I actually consider myself a trophy hunter most of the time. I hunt different states and am always looking for the best animal that I can find. That is unless my freezer is starting to show the bottom then I do both, trophy hunt and meat hunt at the same time. Usually on these hunts I have the whole hunt to get it done so I will usually pass on quite a few smaller animals before I will shoot one towards the end of the hunt just for the freezer if I don't find one of the larger animals. This works for me on any of the North American game animals that I do chase. This last December as a lot of you know I was in Arizona hunting coues deer, and I passed up quite a few smaller ones that we could of stalked to within a reasonable shooting distance and shot, but I held out for the "trophy" that I ended up bringing home. His meat now resides inside of my freezer, what there is of a small deer.

Africa is a whole different animal so to speak. If you have never been over there on a safari I suggest that you do before you form a opinion on what goes on over there. When ever you spend a few thousand dollars on a hunt you want to bring home the best animal that you can. Be it horns, head, or claws you want the best and will usually hunt for the best that the area has to offer. On my trip over there I brought home 3 heads that would qualify for the Roland Ward record book for African game animals. All the meat of the animals was salvaged by the outfitter and processed to be distributed to the locals who worked on his concession and area families, none of it went to waist. The animals were taken whole to the skinning shed where they were skinned and processed with all the body parts that were considered edible were saved.

Perhaps more of the TV shows now days should put more emphasis on the packing out of the meat along with the processing of it along with the antlers or horns. But we also need to do a better job ourselves while out in the field. What I am talking about is the new field processing methods that a lot are adopting. Taking only the back straps and hind quarters of a animal and leaving the rest for the scavengers. Just about every hunting season I come across one or two animals that have been shot with most of the meat still sitting on the ground with the prime cuts taken along with the head of the animal.

 

[Montana]

I?ve expressed my thoughts on trophy hunting more than a few times on here but I support those who are trophy hunters. I?d like to call myself one but I don?t have any huge trophies to support the claim
I live in a great place that filling your freezer is not a challenge in the slightest. I could probably do so with 1 hr of this message, so I go to the next level, and I teach my kids the same.
My daughter took her first deer this year and passed on over 30 bucks before pulling the trigger. Public ground.
Each person has their own story and their own reasoning, but generally speaking a trophy hunter will harvest fewer animals, spend more time in the field and hunt smarter/harder (I know I?ll take some heat on that) but I?d rather be in the field with a trophy hunter, only because we share similar practices.
I don?t believe one should take heat simply because they are after high quality animals. I?d like to think everyone enjoys the meat as well, may not ?brag? about it as much, but still loves it just as much. I have yet to meet a fellow hunter that doesn?t think the have the best Elk steaks in their freezer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk