Brian Payne

I love my Tikka T3 Lite in .300 Win Mag for the very reasons you mentioned.

Wow Jay! That is a sweet buck!

Wow! That is some fantastic video of some great bucks!

Wow Devin! Congrats on two more giant deer. I am glad I am not a big coues buck with you in the hills. How did he change from last January? I don't remember seeing the 4th points in the live photo you posted. I think I guessed him at 118 based on last years photo.

Thanks for all the kind words everyone! Thanks Amanda for fixing the video links.

Sweet video Jay! That makes me want to take better video on my hunts.

No relation to Brad Payne, but condolences to him and his family over the passing of his dad.

CouesRanger, I totally agree with you on all accounts. Utah has implemented antler restrictions and the trophy quality has shown significant improvement. In fact, Elk Hunter Magazine recently ranked a limited draw Utah bull tag as the No. 1 quality bull elk hunt in the west over Arizona. The problem with Colorado is they simply offer way too many tags with so many of them being OTC. You aren't going to make many friends on this forum by bringing up this topic though. Whenever it gets brought up everyone becomes a meat hunter and doesn't care about antlers anymore. I am a trophy hunter through and through and to me some delicious lean meat is a nice "bonus." Maybe that makes my motives wrong in some peoples eyes but at least I am honest with myself. I really don't see how people are willing to spend $1000+ on optics, $1000+ on long rang rifles, $$$$$ on tags, licenses, camping gear, 4x4 trucks, gas, meat processing, ammo, etc., etc. and then say all that really matters is the meat. You are looking at hundreds of dollars/pound for game meat when all is said and done. Last I checked T-bones were only about $10/lb at the grocery store. If it really is all about the meat then just put in for a cow tag every year and let us that care about antlers propose things like antler restrictions. The odds and success rates are a lot better for cow tags. With the way G&F keeps increasing tags it is going to get harder and harder to find trophy animals. Everybody wants to kill a monster but no one is willing to sacrafice the chance of killing a spike or raghorn for a few years to increase the age class of the animals.

Thanks for the birthday wishes guys! Didn't see this until now because I was out hunting. Will post some photos and stories from our successful Dec Coues hunt shortly;)

That is a hammer of a buck. I can see why you asked the question

Good job holding out for what you wanted. Several of those bucks just need one year to be "dayum" class.

Enjoyed your write up Dan. Congrats on a successful hunt.

Cool!

Fantastic write-up Dan! What a neat experience that you got to share with Greg. Fitting that it was over Veteran's Day weekend. Thank you both for your service and sacrifice.

That is too cool Josh!

Cool video and buck!

You wouldn't be fenced in. Many units would have this restriction. If you wanted the opportunity to shoot a spike or two-point you could put in for one of the units without the restriction. If you have no desire to shoot a spike or two point, like mylself, you could put in for a unit with the restrictions and have a better chance at a big buck. I would agree that the restriction should not apply to youth and archery hunts.

I am not a biologist but I would bet that over 90% of coues deer bucks would grow into 3 pts if they were able to get old enough. Large 2-points is definately the exception just like large 5-point bulls happen but are also the exception. I know that spikes and two-points have ALWAYS been slaughtered in the early hunts. The point is that there would be more trophy class deer if there was a 3-pt rule in some units and they didn't get slaughtered. Would you really rather make sure that a few big 2-points don't die of old age than have more big bucks?

I agree that there is nothing wrong with shooting a spike or forky if that is what you want. I am not trying to be sentimental but I personally would rather kill a buck that has had a chance to live for awhile. Never really had the desire to kill juvenile animals, even when I was young. Guess I got it from my Dad. Just like there is nothing wrong with going to the lake and catching a limit of 10" trout and having a fish fry if that is what you want. I would rather put the 10 inchers back in hopes that I could come back in a few months and catch him when he is 14". Just my preference. Just like some fisheries are managed for trophy fish with mimimum sizes, I would like to see G&F manage some deer units for trophies with a minimum size just like has been done successfully in some other states.

That is a good point and would happen from time to time just like when people accidently shoot does. There are several other states that have similar requirements in place for elk and deer. The drastic increase in the quality of Utah's elk is partly due to the 6-points on one side rule in many of their units.

Awesome buck!

There are some really good debates on the forum right now! I personally would love to see a rule that requires a minimum of 3 points on at least one antler. Can you imagine what it would do to the quality of deer? The spikes and 2-points get absolutely slaughtered on these first hunts. Since ethics are such a hot topic right now, how about the ethics of letting a young deer wipe the milk off his lips and at least reach adulthood and breed a few times before we take him out. Nothing against meat hunters if that is really all your in it for, I love the meat as much as anyone, but if you are in it for a trophy, show a little restraint and help manage the quality of the deer a bit by laying off the jevenile deer. I am sure this idea would throw the G&F harvest objectives out of wack and they would have to issue twice as many tags to meet their object and then it really would be WWIII out there. This topic has the potential of getting hot fast!

Good to see the ethics police are still patrolling. They always seem to chime in on this issue. Amanda usually likes us to move these debates to another thread so maybe we should do that with this one. There are several issues that have been brought up that are worthy of discussion. 1. Hunter Safety - In hunter safety we are taught to make sure of our backdrop and that we have a clear path between the rifle and the target. If this deer would have been skylined I would question the shot but there was clearly a clear path for the shot and a solid backdrop. 2. Shot Distance Ethics - This topic is very gray and has been debated on the forum many times. What is an ethical shot and what isn't? Does it have to do with the probability that you can make a clean kill? What is the proper probability? 5 out of10? 7,8,9,10 out of 10? A lot goes into a 1,200 yard shot...bullet drop, wind, angle, altitude, temperature, spin of the earth, etc. Rifles are precise tools and with the right equipment and understanding of conditions and physics they can do some pretty amazing things. A shot like that takes the right equipment COMBINED with the well practiced shooter. My long range rifle has killed animals at 710, 540, 506, 500, 490, 305, 300, 250 and down. NOT ONE animal has been wounded and not recovered. The only animal I have wounded and not recovered was with a muzzleloader...at 58 yards. We would like to think that every shot is going to be a heart shot instant kill but this is just not realistic. The G&F supposedly accounts for unrecovered wounded animals when allotting tag numbers and there is many a half-starved scavenger/predator that is happy to find a meal. I am not condoning wounding animals, just saying that it is part of the equation whether we like it or not. I think it is pretty much a fact that archery hunters wound more animals per tag than rifle hunters. What about the guys that "bird dog" for deer...4 hunters in a line beating the brush? Every shot is a running shot. Are they always aware of their back drop and making high probability shots? They are the ones that scare me, not long distance guys. The hunter in this case put the time and money into his ability to make a shot like this and proved that he could be making it. Much more ethical than the guy that goes and blows a few holes in the old TV at fifty yds and calls his gun sited in. 3. Getting Closer As we all know, the closer the shot, the higher probability of a clean kill, but....deer don't stand in the same place all day, other hunters move into the area etc. I see one hill in the photo that would have provided a closer shot but it looks to me like it would have taken a good deal of time to get there and would have still provided a long shot. Getting closer is always one of those heat of the moment key decisions "do I risk getting getting no shot to get closer for a better shot or take the shot that I have now?" Congrats to the hunter on a great shot! I would have let him walk and grow up for next year but that is a whole different "ethics" debate;)

That buck is fuuuunky! Awesome deer!

Monster 2-point is right! If he nets over 107 he could be entered in the Arizona Wildlife Trophies Book. Only one other 2-point listed in there. That one didn't even have eyeguards and netted over 110! Congrats on a great buck!