Except that ram ain’t 3/4 curl and from the amount of money the boddingtons spend on hunts they aren’t average people
I hate to have to be the first person to tell you this, but life isn’t fair. Influential people in positions of power and influence have always given preferential treatment to those they like. Second guessing the person charged with verifying a game animal, based on internet photos seems like a waste of time on many levels.
I learned this as a teenager when a big house party was busted - luckily more than a few kids were from influential families and the very next week the city council rewrote the city codes for what constitutes probable cause to investigate a house party and made it retroactive a month. That would have never happened just on my behalf.
Fast forward a decade and an accident involving some VIP’s with high political ties quietly went away. A fellow from a non-descript “corporation” wrote big checks in exchange for non disclosure agreements for everyone with first hand knowledge of what happened. Knowing powerful senators should change the rules of what’s fair? Like it or not, it does.
Every decade since then I’ve watched a black and white situation get resolved by who had the most money, highest political ties, and most IOU’s to call in.
Who goes to big hunting conventions and high dollar fund raisers? Who goes hunting with governors and senators? Who gets invited when a billionaire needs a +1 for an exclusive hunt. Favors get traded.
I used to think otherwise, and nit pick situations and be frustrated when what was happening didn’t line up with what I thought was justice. Having attorneys for clients has reinforced the idea that the most black and white laws have gray areas in how they are applied. Most other laws have gray areas in what they mean, and influential people are good at increasing the amount of gray in it all.