Business of trophy hunting and fair chase

[AGPank]

I saw some pictures on Instagram of an amazing bull taken in AZ. It’s not clear if it’s rifle or archery, but a video shows nine men, the hunter, and another taking the video.

There’s talk of this team monitoring the bull for some time to put the hunter on the bull. I assume a mix of trail cams and scouting.

The hunter likely paid a substantial guide / trophy fee.

I’m curious about others opinions if at what point is something like this no longer fair chase.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WCB]

I still think it is fair chase...It just isn't the experience I would want no matter what animal or what size. You see it mostly in UT, AZ, NM where there is a small army going out and one guy has a tag and everyone is radioing back and forth.

Maybe if they (the other 9 guys) were surrounding the animal or doing something similar to direct the animal while not having a tag then it would cross the line. or actively blocking other hunters out. Big problem with your question is you will get guys that say guided hunts in general are not fair chase.

 

[3darcher2]

Anyone who spends $100K plus for a Governor's tag in any given state isn't likely to fret another 20 or 30 for a guide service.

To me, it's still fair chase, but that's about the limit. I think the several month statewide season is a bigger advantage of those tags.

 

[bsnedeker]

Ifit's legal it is fair chase as far as I'm concerned. While it's not something I would enjoy personally I'm not in the business of judging other people's choices. If that's how you like to hunt and F&G doesn't have a problem with it then go for it.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[KHNC]

Bull was 470 i believe. Jimmy Johns sub dude.

 

[Ross]

if legal it is still fair chase but not my cup of tea

 

[Life_Feeds_On_Life]

Bull was 470 i believe. Jimmy Johns pizza dude.

* sandwich guy. But yeah I'm not 100% sure how I feel about it all.

 

[Gerbdog]

Mixed feelings about it... its not worth that kind of money to me, but if i had his bank account available.... would i still say that? I also like looking at my trophy hanging on the wall and think about the blood, sweat, tears and just downright luck it took to obtain it. I feel like I'd look at that 470 bull and say ... "well that's certainly an amazing creation, kinda feel bad i had my handheld up to the point I killed it, guess ill make up an epic story". As mentioned above, ain't my place to judge others, can only offer how i'd feel about it.

 

[LostArra]

I avoid any discussion about Governor's tags since that is well above my pay grade, literally.

 

[FlyGuy]

Like others, not the experience I’m personally looking for, but I imagine the guy that can afford that tag doesn’t have weeks of free time to spend in the woods scouting either.

In the end, it’s best for everyone if the guy or gal that buys the gov tag walks away with a huge bull and lots of pictures. He’s happy with his purchase and feels he got his money’s worth out of it, the guide gets lots of positive publicity to help his business, and the state generates lots of interest from future ultra wealthy hunters for next year’s tag.

As far as the amount of people involved on this hunt, yeah - it seems excessive at first glance. But I sort of doubt that the decision on the amount of manpower required was driven by the client.... put yourself in the guide’s shoes for a minute. If you had the incredible opportunity to guide this super high profile hunt - wouldn’t you do every (legal) thing possible to make sure you got the man on a GREAT bull? Of course you would! Failure is not an option. Imagine all the negative publicity A3 would receive if they were known as “the guide service who couldn’t even find a decent bull for the holder of the gov tag”. If it’s me, no way I’m taking that chance! I’m not going in there with 1 or two guides just like it’s any other contracted hunt. I’m using every available resource to keep tabs on that bull 24/7! Someone has eyes on that giant all-day-every-day for 3 months leading up to this hunt.





You can’t cheat the mountain

 

[cnelk]

Id be more impressed with a guy shooting a 280" bull in an OTC area.

 

[String&stick]

I will agree and disagree with some (on technical points). Game and fish may say it's legal to have a high fence ranch. . . That means it's legal but it's not fair chase, so legal doesn't equal fair chase. And I know that's not what you were saying just clarifying.

The thing I would have to look at is the regulations on electronic communications in AZ. Most states have laws against communication the whereabouts of game via electronic devices (cell phones, radios, Morse code, etc) I'm not saying they did, but with that many people it would be hard not to be conveying that info by phone or another device. And that would agree with everyone's statements saying that would be outside the law and thus not fair chase. This is probably one of the most commonly broken laws in the hunting world.

Amazing bull, bought and paid for, but at least they guy isn't hunting a high fence ranch some where and then acting like a great hunter, he's just using his trophy sized bank account to pay for people to find the biggest animals he can. I'll tip my hat to him for that at least.

 

[Bmoore]

As far as fair chase goes, I don’t see how paying a group of people to find a wild animal for you to shoot is any less fair chase than you yourself finding that animal to shoot. The animal is still wild, and requires effort to harvest. In my mind that means it’s still fair chase. To me, in order to be not fair chase it would have to include some form of chase or harvest that would otherwise be considered not fair chase such as using a helicopter to track the animal or something. The hunt is still the same regardless of who pulled the trigger.
I agree with others that it’s not the most desirable form of actually harvesting the animal. There’s a lot more pride in doing it all yourself. But that’s a different question entirely. To me it doesn’t seem anything would make this type of hunt not fair chase.

 

[Rich M]

It's not ours to judge. He's happy, got the monster for the wall and possibly the record book.

 

[CAElkhunter]

It was legal, ethical and he could afford it. If you choose to judge him it is a slippery slope as he is just using a lot of human "trail cams". If that is how he rolls good for him. We all have our preferences and what we can afford or find value in. As long as it wasn't high fenced, driven then it is his choice of how he wants to get a record book Elk. Once again good for him, although I think most of us look at any animal on our wall and re-live the adventure / story of how he got there in our minds. Not sure the "paid for" Elk has the same value in his mind, but that is for him to decide.

 

[LongWayAround]

I definitely believe that having a team watch an animal until they ferry you over in the helicopter is a diminishment of the animal. The shooter looks stoked though, so good for him and the funds certainly go to the right place. I don't think negatively of the tag holder but the methodology seems lame to me.

Question for those who say not to pass any judgement: Do you think someone who buys one of these hunts cares about the meat? The thread about the frozen muley in game bags sure elicited some strong feelings on the subject of meat.

It's still more fair chase than the dbags that pick one out of a pen and shoot it for their hero shot/shoulder mount in Africa though.

 

[Gerbdog]

Question for those who say not to pass any judgement: Do you think someone who buys one of these hunts cares about the meat? The thread about the frozen muley in game bags sure elicited some strong feelings on the subject of meat.

I sure hope he at least took a backstrap and tenderloin to enjoy.... In my mind the meat is the sacred bit of the animal, the antlers are just a perk. That being said.... as long as the meat didn't sit and rot, or sit frozen in a game bag as you mentioned, I guess I'm fine with wherever it went. I know a lot of these hunters you see on youtube who harvest many multiple animals in lots of states every year sure don't take the meat home with them, they end up donating it to various places, which is fine with me, as long as someone gets to enjoy it. I tend to be generous with meat I harvest and gift it to friends and family as well, its all part of my "tribe".

 

[ELKhunter60]

To me it seems like there are two schools of thought.

1) Was the bull taken legally without any fences confining the animal? In those legal terms, the animal was
taken fair chase.

2) In moral terms was the bull taken fair chase? For some yes, and for some no as is the case with anything
involving morality.

The reason I hunt is because I love the challenge of the sport, I love the places we get to do it, and I love the people I do it with. I don't think I could check all of those boxes doing this hunt. So for me, it's not my thing. But, if others want to kill big bulls that way - that's up to them.

 

[Life_Feeds_On_Life]

If you choose to judge him it is a slippery slope as he is just using a lot of human "trail cams".

To me the difference is this is more like human cellular trail cams. If you have a group of guys watching every move the animal makes for days if not weeks then texting or calling about the location it just seems like some of the fair chase is diminished.

 

[CAElkhunter]

I went on a hunt in AZ years ago in trophy zone where quite a few of the guys left their meat. They were there
purely for the mount. I found that sad. I eat everything I shoot no matter how old. There is always some way of prep that you can do and I feel it is your obligation to the animal to eat his meat.