What Unit would you apply for

[mje1]

I have 18 points now so maybe in the next few years I can finally go on a Goat Hunt. I'm not looking for 80" plus Well maybe I'am but the high 70s would be a Great Trophy. What Iam looking for is a great hunting experience and not an area where it is a race to every nice Buck out there if there is such a unit. I would love to do a Muzzleloader hunt since I've been on a couple hunts with friends and they were great hunts and my Muzzleloader is a tack driver out to 200. I've called the guys in 19a and they want $1000.00 trespass fee and they were only letting one gun hunter on, too risky. 2b is hurting and 18a seems pretty tough with the distance between the herds. 8 is where Keep heading back to but I don't know if it has Quality Numbers. If I didn't live so far away from those units I would be scouting all the time so I could make up my mind. Rifle units I've been kicking around are 7,9 and 10. Any insight from you guys would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks Mark

[wildwoody]

if your talking abought speed goats/ antilope, i would put in for 4a by the ohaca ranch. I've gotten 2 speed goats up there on was 87 6/8 and 1 was 89 4/8 and there were even bigger. graet hunt and not alot of pressure and no trespass fees. goodluck. what is the max points for speed goats now. thanks

[mje1]

Thanks for the info I appreciate it. Going into the 2013 draw there were 4 people with 24 points

[EliGrimmett]

wildwoody, Do you have any photos of your bucks? I'd love to see them!

 

I've scouted quite a bit in 4A over the last several years. The biggest buck I've seen in there was the buck I attached a photo of - net scored 88 2/8. I've seen several mid-80's type bucks, but overall I don't usually see a lot of bucks.

 

[jeremiah lindsey]

probably to late now but 3B is a good area and so is unit 1 not sure if unit 1 is muzzleloader

[wildwoody]

ill try not shore yet how to post pictures yet. ones a 18 1/2 inch and one is 18 but i get 3 scoores below the prong do to the prongs start up at 9 inches there seem to be 2 different geans up ther big paddles whitch start at about 3 to 4 inches up and the other start at 8 to 9 inches up. i shoot these bucks in 98 and 1999 . ive also no of 2 over shoot up there 1 over 94 and 1 over 92. all depends on the winter moistuer. ill try posting pictures i also have a 223 inch mulie. thanks good luck on your next draw

[123456]

3 scores below the prongs? Is this possible? I would love to see these antelope, I love big antelope. 18" horns sounds amazing!!!!

[wildwoody]

the bone and crocket book shows to devide the horns into 4 quarters then if the 3rd falls below the prong pull the sting tight and if it doesn't slide down you take the score below the prong. it had three official booner scores fighting back and fourth it was nuts. ill post them both when i figure it out.

[THOR]

This is my Dad's 4A buck from 2011. It has three before as well and grosses 82.

[wildwoody]

nice buck, thats the gean but mine have longer tops with 2 1/2 ivory tips

[StickFlicker]

Woody is correct. The B&C rules state that if the third circumference measurement falls on the prong, take the measurement immediately below the prong (before swelling of the prong begins). Therefore, it is possible, although far from common, that a buck could have three measurements below the prong. Pope & Young does not allow that. They require that two measurements be taken above and two below the prongs.

 

I personally prefer the P&Y rule as is seems to make more sense to me. Why reward a buck for having high prongs, and cause it to be listed above bucks that have actually grown more horn, just because the prongs are high? Are high prongs something that hunters seek as a positive attribute in pronghorn? I think mass, overall length and prong length are all more important to the average hunter than where the prongs occur.

[wildwoody]

yup thats the crap i went thru with B&C one of the scorers didn't care what the book said it was his personal opinion i guess when some become an official scorer you through the book away and use there opinion but not all of them. i like the way they do it in africa they go by cubic inches with water displacement why do we desrespect these animals with deduction arent they all beautiful and uneak in there own way. stickflicker thankyou for the clarification maybe ill have you rescore them. mike cupal scored them the first time. no mater what a scorer thinks i shoot them and i own them. ill try to post them soon if i can figure it out. im just a dumb electrician . as you can see by my spelling. i just have one question if you think the score should be in the prong then what about all the extra mass, if the prong wasn't 9 inches up and was at 4 inches up the mass would have went to the prong and would have had 7 inch prongs instead of 4 1/2" prongs so why do you believe prong is better then mass. just wondering. thankyou

[StickFlicker]

Woody,

 

Your comment about the way they score horns in Africa is not correct. I'm not aware of anywhere in the world where water dispacement is used as an official scoring system. There have been hunters that think it is a good idea, but I don't believe anyone actually practices it as a records system. There have been other conversations on the topic, so I won't rehash them too much here, but it is really a totally impractical idea. Sure it sounds good in theory, but.... The size of a tub of water would have to be huge to measure elk, moose, and many other animals. Can you imagine too many measurers that would want to have those on hand? Many hunters don't get their animals scored until they have been mounted. There would be no way to submerge just the horns or antlers without the ears, etc. getting submerged and causing excess displacement. Can you imagine how happy a hunter would be if you had to submerge his mounted head in water? Even under perfect circumstances, the difference in the amount of water that would be displaced between a 90 inch antelope and a 65 inch antelope would be negligible. A small horned animal like a mountain goat would be even less.

 

Africa actually uses one of two measuring systems most commonly, both of them seriously flawed in my opinion. SCI and Roland and Ward both take very few measurements to determine an African specie's trophy's score. I'm not an expert on them, but the basics are pretty simple. Sometimes just the length of the two horns are added together (with no mass scores at all), but sometimes a base circumference is added as well (nothing along the rest of the length of the horn). Therefore, there are a lot of ties in the records. Scoring systems that are made up of mostly or entirely just the length of the horns cause females to be the top scoring records in many species, encouraging trophy hunters to kill females rather than males. Gemsbok, eland and many other African species have females as their world records since the females of many species commonly have longer horns than the males (although normally thinner). It's my understanding that even the world record Cape Buffalo is a cow rather than a bull. I just don't think that encouraging the killing of females is a sound basis for a records program.

 

Mike Cupell is one of the most experienced scorers in the state, and I would be fairly certain he followed the rules as set out by the B&C Club. Perhaps there's a misunderstanding somewhere?

 

I didn't understand everything you were trying to say, especially your question at the end. But if you are under the impression that the length of the prong measurement is changed by where it appears on the horn, that's not truely correct. It would likely change it a small amount, but not by the several inches that you state. The prong is measured in the exact same manner no matter where it occurs on the horn. The only reason the length of the prong itself might be different between one location and another is because prongs are measured from the center of the back of the horn, around the horn and accross the top of the prong to its tip. If the horn itself is thicker at one point versus the other, it will change the length of the prong a small amount, certainly not 2 1/2 inches. Additionally, the quarterly mass measurements are never taken "in" the prong. They are always taken either above or below the prong, depending on where the prong occurs.

 

I really didn't understand your comment about my prefering prongs to mass. Mass is by far the most important thing for a high scoring pronghorn, making up some or all of 10 of the 12 measurements included in the final score. Hopefully this made sense to you, but if not, feel free to try to ask your question(s) again.

Marvin

[wildwoody]

i'm sorry if you didn't understand. First I was under the understanding that water diplacement was used in Africa, never been there myself but a 76 year old man who has been there often and he told me that so i could be wrong my point on that was we should use all the animal has and take no deductions, but thats me. now I had talked to Mike Cupell numerouse times and he told me he would not give a 3rd score below the prong no mater what. and that is fact! this was in 1998 maybe he has changed his mind I never said he was a bad person. next what i was trying to say , here is anouther way to put it, would you not get a lower score if you took the 3rd measurement above the prong then below and in the picture of the antilope before this conversation have a larger prong if it didn't start so high so you have more mass if the prong starts at 9" than at 4 inches.Does that make more sence maybe not. I'm not arguing with you it's just that you scores no it all thats why your official scores I'll give you that respect, this is the reason I never put my troffies in the book and I have a few . Either in SCI or B&C i"m not trying to be disrespectfull it just gets frustrating thankyou for the convo, i will admit I'm not always right but some can"t. thankyou for your time

[Pine Donkey]

Wow, it sure did not take long for this post to get hijacked. Anybody out there want to comment on the original question?