Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
-
- Posts: 311
- Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:12 am
- Location: Ohio
- Status: Offline
Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
Do you guys think hunting would benefit if record books were divided into a Public Land & Private Land Division? I know many of you do not care about rack size, nor have interest in entering your buck into a record book. But I come at this more from a woodsmanship standpoint. When I was growing up in the 80's big bucks were far more rare than they are today. Yet a guy like Myles Keller seemingly was killing a big buck year after year. He'd research what counties in a state big bucks came from and then he would go hunt them down. His accomplishments stood out as did his woodsmanship & tactics. It felt like the playing field was more level then. Access was easier. Deer specific food plots were rare. The Wensel's also stood out. Though the large majority of their hunting took place on private land, they were still very tactics based hunters. Those were the guys I indirectly received my hunting foundation from through my dad who hunted using their tactics.
Today magazines and tv shows are filled with giant bucks. It's nothing to see a 160"+ typical. In most instances the hunts take place on ultra managed private land over food plots. To make sure I wasn't exaggerating I did some research in the Ohio Big Bucks Record Book (est 1957). Of the top 50 typical & top 50 non-typical bucks all time, 75 of the 100 were take between 1994-2018 (only 8 came in the 1980's). I used 1994 as the cutoff because that was the year Mead Paper company started leasing the land I grew up hunting to a private hunting club. Previous to then Mead had a deal with the state of Ohio to allow public hunting on their land. Soon after the leasing boom hit. Now I do not know how many of those 75 bucks were taken on private land but regardless there is a definitive correlation.
I have no problem with private land by the way. I think it's awesome for a person to be able to work hard and purchase or lease land and enjoy it. They've earned it. If I was a land owner I would love to manage a property and try to grow/kill the biggest buck possible. But it seems like an arms race for the guys on television- year around food plots, minerals, nutrition programs. In my mind it's a different challenge with a different set of tactics.
For the hunter who does not have access to private land it's a whole different ballgame. I stopped reading North American Whitetail magazine and others like it sometime in the early 2000s because very little of it applied to me, a public land hunter. It seemed to all be gadgets, food plots, leases, outfitters, private farms. And it wasn't until I randomly happened to listen to a Midwest whitetail podcast with Dan Infalt that I had even heard of him. Finally someone who hunted public land and talked about tactics & thermals & bedding etc. It was no surprise when finding out more about him that Keller was someone he looked up to in hunting.
My thought was by creating a public land and private land division in the books there would be a renewed spotlight on tactics & woodsmanship for the public land hunter, with the public land division being like Pope & Young (just for public land entries) and private land or open division being like Boone & Crockett. And for me it wouldn't be about hunter notoriety. Instead it would be a way to identify guys who are getting it done on a regular basis and then the tactics and woodsmanship being shared. For the new/novice or even seasoned public land hunter it would show what's realistic and what's possible by guys doing it under the same conditions they hunt. It could be by state, regional, countrywide. Maybe body weight and age class if possible could be added? Maybe writers/magazines/tv shows would catch on?
What do you guys think?
Today magazines and tv shows are filled with giant bucks. It's nothing to see a 160"+ typical. In most instances the hunts take place on ultra managed private land over food plots. To make sure I wasn't exaggerating I did some research in the Ohio Big Bucks Record Book (est 1957). Of the top 50 typical & top 50 non-typical bucks all time, 75 of the 100 were take between 1994-2018 (only 8 came in the 1980's). I used 1994 as the cutoff because that was the year Mead Paper company started leasing the land I grew up hunting to a private hunting club. Previous to then Mead had a deal with the state of Ohio to allow public hunting on their land. Soon after the leasing boom hit. Now I do not know how many of those 75 bucks were taken on private land but regardless there is a definitive correlation.
I have no problem with private land by the way. I think it's awesome for a person to be able to work hard and purchase or lease land and enjoy it. They've earned it. If I was a land owner I would love to manage a property and try to grow/kill the biggest buck possible. But it seems like an arms race for the guys on television- year around food plots, minerals, nutrition programs. In my mind it's a different challenge with a different set of tactics.
For the hunter who does not have access to private land it's a whole different ballgame. I stopped reading North American Whitetail magazine and others like it sometime in the early 2000s because very little of it applied to me, a public land hunter. It seemed to all be gadgets, food plots, leases, outfitters, private farms. And it wasn't until I randomly happened to listen to a Midwest whitetail podcast with Dan Infalt that I had even heard of him. Finally someone who hunted public land and talked about tactics & thermals & bedding etc. It was no surprise when finding out more about him that Keller was someone he looked up to in hunting.
My thought was by creating a public land and private land division in the books there would be a renewed spotlight on tactics & woodsmanship for the public land hunter, with the public land division being like Pope & Young (just for public land entries) and private land or open division being like Boone & Crockett. And for me it wouldn't be about hunter notoriety. Instead it would be a way to identify guys who are getting it done on a regular basis and then the tactics and woodsmanship being shared. For the new/novice or even seasoned public land hunter it would show what's realistic and what's possible by guys doing it under the same conditions they hunt. It could be by state, regional, countrywide. Maybe body weight and age class if possible could be added? Maybe writers/magazines/tv shows would catch on?
What do you guys think?
- DhD
- 500 Club
- Posts: 900
- Joined: Thu Feb 28, 2019 4:53 pm
- Location: Nebraska
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
Thought about this for a second, and I don't think I would have a problem with splitting the records. Public land=level playing field. Verifying where it was shot could be a problem.
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
- Lu Rome
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 4:30 pm
- Location: Nebraska
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
I think that's not what the record books are about. They were never meant to be a registry of phallic lengths. While they may be used for that, separating public and private would just amplify the issue. It's basically saying that "I did this on public land, so I'm a better hunter than you rich private land owner". That's a harsh representation of your words I know, but that's the gist and a narrative around many public land hunting circles. We don't need more division among hunters.
Let the record books be what they are, a registry of overall herd health, and quit worrying about them so much.
Let the record books be what they are, a registry of overall herd health, and quit worrying about them so much.
“Curiosity never killed the cat. The cat died from stupidity, or maybe an overdose of mice.” -The Old Man
- rfickes87
- 500 Club
- Posts: 1076
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 4:27 am
- Location: PENNSYLVANIA
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
Personally, I read record books simply for scouting purposes. But if a public version was made available I'd be more interested to read it than the current version. I'm sure if there was such a book, many entries would not make the book. My uncle just put his in the PA book 2 years ago year that he took on private. I bet if he shot it on public and only had access to public he would not have told everyone about it and gone and had it officially entered... I think many others would be the same so what you'd be reading would look much more misleading than what it out there now to read.
Here in PA the game commission keeps a state record book. The new archery typical record was just taken last year (or maybe the year before) and they were quick to point out that it was taken on public land and even said the county and the land which really narrowed it down to the precise area, lol. That's bad for that hunter but I think its beneficial for the masses of "there aint no deer in PA" hunters to see that and realize that there actually are nice deer around. Keeping a public book could be appealing to those who have stopped buying a license and have given up. Could be a good enticement to get the hunter numbers back up.
just my 2 cents
Here in PA the game commission keeps a state record book. The new archery typical record was just taken last year (or maybe the year before) and they were quick to point out that it was taken on public land and even said the county and the land which really narrowed it down to the precise area, lol. That's bad for that hunter but I think its beneficial for the masses of "there aint no deer in PA" hunters to see that and realize that there actually are nice deer around. Keeping a public book could be appealing to those who have stopped buying a license and have given up. Could be a good enticement to get the hunter numbers back up.
just my 2 cents
"Pressure and Time. That's all it takes, really. Pressure, and time..."
- WV Bowhunter
- 500 Club
- Posts: 1629
- Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 5:39 pm
- Location: West Virginia
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
Although I’ve had a few bucks officially scored, I’ve never entered anything in the books. It really doesn’t matter to me where a buck was shot, public or private. To me, a name in a book doesn’t make a guy a better hunter. Two of my best three scoring bucks were shot on public land, not saying they were easy, but it is almost easier for me to find a big buck on public than on most any of the private I’ve hunted. Private I’ve been on gets pounded and at least I feel I can out walk someone on public and have some ground to myself.
Luck is when preparation meets opportunity!!
-
- 500 Club
- Posts: 550
- Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:00 pm
- Location: NE Iowa
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
I think they should be kept how they are. Honestly record books aren't for me. Never entered any, but do like seeing big deer each year that do get entered. As stated it would be hard to verify, and deer travel. A deer could spend 99 percent of his time on private and chase a doe into public and catch an arrow. So that deer will be entered as a public land deer, but was he really or was it just blind luck.
I also think that the books were meant to be and still should be about the animal and not about the hunter.
I also think that the books were meant to be and still should be about the animal and not about the hunter.
- elk yinzer
- 500 Club
- Posts: 1229
- Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:39 am
- Location: Central PA
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
Nah, I get the premise but it does nothing for me. From my perpective record books devalue more important aspects of hunting, my opinion honestly. I've come to think most of the famous hunters such as those cited are just better self promoters. Every nook and cranny in this country has some stone cold deer killers. I'd wager less than 10% of book deer in my neck of the woods are entered. Let the foodplotters keep the books, they can have them far as I am concerned.
Treasurer, United Bowhunters of PA
https://ubofpa.org/membership-3
https://ubofpa.org/membership-3
-
- 500 Club
- Posts: 623
- Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:27 am
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
I could care less about what happens in the record books. I agree that hunting has become very commercialized and people can manage for bigger deer if they have the proper resources. Most of these people on TV don't enter their bucks anyways. At the end of the day everyone has their own goals/desires. I will never enter any animals into any record book regardless if they change the way it is currently done. There are a lot of guys who do get it done every year but don't want any notoriety or anybody knowing that they are doing this. They are reclusive and don't need people following them around. Dan has stated that guys do this to him. I'd say shoot what makes you happy and forget the record books. Most people could care less how many or how big of deer you are shooting. Do it for you and not for what others will think. That is what hunting is supposed to be about.
- Hawthorne
- 500 Club
- Posts: 6217
- Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2014 2:13 pm
- Location: michigan
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
I just bought the Michigan big game records book recently. I thought it was pretty cool looking thru it and saw a couple beast members names in it. I think it would be pretty cool if someone did one for public land. It would take along time to pile data imo. They did one for traditional bows only. It’s called Compton. Named after the famous bowhunter will compton
- Dewey
- Moderator
- Posts: 36727
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 7:57 pm
- Location: Wisconsin
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
We don’t need any more divisions in hunting.
- milkweed-militia
- 500 Club
- Posts: 571
- Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 1:52 am
- Facebook: Ross Brawner
- Location: Tennessee
- Status: Offline
-
- 500 Club
- Posts: 7865
- Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2014 12:54 pm
- Location: Medon Tn
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
Record books are a flawed system adding one more wont fix the issues. The reduction system of bc.
The py requirements are just bad lighted nock wont even count.
I hunt because I love it not to be added to a book.
It would be neat to know the caliber of bucks each wma has produced previously but I don't see that being possible.
The py requirements are just bad lighted nock wont even count.
I hunt because I love it not to be added to a book.
It would be neat to know the caliber of bucks each wma has produced previously but I don't see that being possible.
Last edited by Tennhunter3 on Wed Jul 31, 2019 7:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Never give up Freedom for imagined safety.
- Boogieman1
- 500 Club
- Posts: 6589
- Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2017 11:18 pm
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
Hawthorne wrote:I just bought the Michigan big game records book recently. I thought it was pretty cool looking thru it and saw a couple beast members names in it. I think it would be pretty cool if someone did one for public land. It would take along time to pile data imo. They did one for traditional bows only. It’s called Compton. Named after the famous bowhunter will compton
Believe Compton's is more of just a documentation of animals killed with traditional equipment out of fear years later that some may claim the weapon as not effective. The records would provide decades of proof that it is a very effective weapon. Has nothing to do with any kind of scoring atleast this is my understanding.
I wouldn't mind a public hunting record book much the same. One that has nothing to do with score but just keeps track of public deer killed by state and county.
Personally feel p&y book is a joke and nothing more than a money grab to charge folks to put there name in a book that is outdated the day it's printed. I mean just look at the minimums, while it may be a very nice buck. Are we really calling a 120" buck Record Book material.
Life is hard; It’s even harder if you are stupid.
-John Wayne-
-John Wayne-
- DaveT1963
- 500 Club
- Posts: 5196
- Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2014 1:27 am
- Location: South
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
The record books are for people: animals don't get caught up in such trivial matters.
Rumble Channel: https://rumble.com/user/DaveT1963
You Tube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/davetoms63
Journal: https://www.thehuntingbeast.com/viewtop ... 91&t=30244
Tethrd Pro Staff
You Tube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/davetoms63
Journal: https://www.thehuntingbeast.com/viewtop ... 91&t=30244
Tethrd Pro Staff
- DaveT1963
- 500 Club
- Posts: 5196
- Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2014 1:27 am
- Location: South
- Status: Offline
Re: Should Record Books be Divided into Public Land & Private Land Divisions?
Boogieman1 wrote:Hawthorne wrote:I just bought the Michigan big game records book recently. I thought it was pretty cool looking thru it and saw a couple beast members names in it. I think it would be pretty cool if someone did one for public land. It would take along time to pile data imo. They did one for traditional bows only. It’s called Compton. Named after the famous bowhunter will compton
Believe Compton's is more of just a documentation of animals killed with traditional equipment out of fear years later that some may claim the weapon as not effective. The records would provide decades of proof that it is a very effective weapon. Has nothing to do with any kind of scoring atleast this is my understanding.
I wouldn't mind a public hunting record book much the same. One that has nothing to do with score but just keeps track of public deer killed by state and county.
Personally feel p&y book is a joke and nothing more than a money grab to charge folks to put there name in a book that is outdated the day it's printed. I mean just look at the minimums, while it may be a very nice buck. Are we really calling a 120" buck Record Book material.
120" whitetail in some regions is a stud and probably a mature animal. Perception is reality; for those wearing the glasses. In other words our reality is framed by what we see but it may not be truth.
Rumble Channel: https://rumble.com/user/DaveT1963
You Tube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/davetoms63
Journal: https://www.thehuntingbeast.com/viewtop ... 91&t=30244
Tethrd Pro Staff
You Tube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/davetoms63
Journal: https://www.thehuntingbeast.com/viewtop ... 91&t=30244
Tethrd Pro Staff
-
- Advertisement
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 81 guests