Fair Chase Winter 2018 by Boone and Crockett Club

WINTER 2018 | $9.95

2019 YOU ARE INVITED to the Greatest Hunters' Convention on the Planet â&#x201E;¢

DALLAS SAFARI CLUB with SPORTS AFIELD presents MOGAMBO Jan 17-20, 2019 Kay Bailey Hutchison Convention Center, Dallas

Fo r more info ca l l To l l Fre e 1 - 8 0 0 - 9 GO - HU NT ( 800- 946- 4868) E m ai l : i nf o @ bi ggame.org 2

FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

TABLE OF CONTENTS 6

FROM THE EDITOR | 100 Issues of Fair Chase

THE OFFICI A L PUBLICATION OF THE BOONE A ND CROCK ETT CLUB

Volume 34 n Number 4 n Winter 2018

24. Working to Improve Forest Health

FROM THE PRESIDENT | In the Arena

B.B. Hollingsworth, Jr.

10 CAPITOL COMMENTS | A Clash Between Professional Judgment and the Law Steven Williams 14

ACCURATE HUNTER | Ranging, Rangefinders, and Trajectory Compensation

AN ASSIST FROM FINLAND

WORKING TO IMPROVE FOREST HEALTH

TRAILBLAZER SPOTLIGHT | BOYT HARNESS COMPANY

ON MY HONOR

18. An Assist from Finland

34. MOHAB

Craig Boddington

Wayne van Zwoll

James L. Cummins

Robert D. Brown

MOHAB | MONTANA HIGH ADVENTURE BASE

THE NEED FOR WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND POLICY | PART 2

52. Bears on an Edge

Doug Painter

Luke Coccoli

Robert D. Brown

B&C HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE

SCIENCE BLASTS | Assessing the Science Behind Opposition to Mountain Lion Hunting John F. Organ

EDUCATING THE NEXT GENERATION OF CONSERVATION LEADERS

BEARS ON AN EDGE

EVOLUTION OF THE FIELD PHOTO | PART 1

DIY - ARIZONA COUES’ DEER

BEYOND THE SCORE| Houndsmen and Black Water Bears

TROPHY TALK | Judges Panels

GENERATION NEXT | 30th Awards Youth Trophy List

RECENTLY ACCEPTED TROPHIES AND TROPHY PHOTO GALLERY 30 th Awards Program Entries

The Wildlife Society and Boone and Crockett Club’s University Programs

62 DIY - Arizona Coues’ Deer

58. Evolution of the Field Photo | Part 1

Two Dall’s rams in the Alaska Range of central Alaska. © Donald M. Jones

Jennifer Smith and David Williams

Keith Balfourd

Justin Spring

Angelo Baio

Justin Spring

CAUGHT ON CAMERA

Photos from the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Ranch

@BooneAndCrockettClub #BooneAndCrockettClub

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8

ABOUT THE BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB MISSION STATEMENT

It is the mission of the Boone and Crockett Club to promote the conservation and management of wildlife, especially big game, and its habitat, to preserve and encourage hunting and to maintain the highest ethical standards of fair chase and sportsmanship in North America. VISIONS FOR THE CLUB n

We envision a future in which the Boone and Crockett Club continues to be an internationally-recognized leader in conservation, especially in research, education, and the demonstration of sustainable conservation practices. A future in which the Club continues its legacy as a key leader in national conservation policy. A future in which the Club continues to be North America’s leader in big game records keeping as a conservation tool. A future in which the Club’s members continue to be respected and commended for their individual and collective contributions to conservation. A future in which the Club’s leadership and management continue as examples of excellence, and programs remain balanced with financial capability. A future in which the Club’s activities continue to be highly-focused and effective, and as a result, natural resources sharing, wildlife populations, habitats, and recreational hunting opportunities continue to improve through, and beyond the 21st century.

VISIONS FOR WILDLIFE AND CONSERVATION n

We envision a future in which wildlife and its habitat, in all their natural diversity, are managed and conserved throughout North America. A future in which hunting continues to be enjoyed under rules of fair chase, sportsmanship, and ethical respect for the land. A future in which all users of natural resources respect the rights of others in the spirit of sharing. A future in which the value and conservation of private land habitat is respected and supported. A future in which North Americans are committed to the principle that their use of resources must be sustainable both for themselves and future generations. A future in which hunting opportunities exist for all desiring to participate.

Club President – B.B. Hollingsworth, Jr. Secretary – Mary Webster Treasurer – Marshall J. Collins, Jr. Executive Vice President – Administration James F. Arnold Executive Vice President – Conservation Timothy C. Brady Vice President of Administration James L. Cummins Vice President of Big Game Records Eldon L. “Buck” Buckner Vice President of Conservation Anthony J. Caligiuri Vice President of Communications CJ Buck Foundation President – R. Terrell McCombs Class of 2018 Paul V. Phillips Class of 2019 A.C. Smid Class of 2020 John P. Evans

FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Editor-in-Chief – Doug Painter Managing Editor – Karlie Slayer Conservation and History Editor Steven Williams Research and Education Editors John F. Organ William F. Porter Hunting and Ethics Editor Mark Streissguth Assistant Editors Keith Balfourd CJ Buck Kendall Hoxsey Kyle M. Lehr Marc Mondavi Jack Reneau Tony A. Schoonen Justin Spring Julie L. Tripp Editorial Contributors Keith Balfourd Craig Boddington Robert D. Brown Luke Coccoli James L. Cummins B.B. Hollingsworth, Jr. John F. Organ Doug Painter Jennifer Smith Justin Spring David Williams Steven Williams Wayne van Zwoll Photographic Contributors Denver Bryan Donald M. Jones Mark Mesenko

Fair Chase is published quarterly by the Boone and Crockett Club and distributed to its Members and Associates. Material in this magazine may be freely quoted and/or reprinted in other publications and media, so long as proper credit is given to Fair Chase. The only exception applies to articles that are reprinted in Fair Chase from other magazines, in which case, the Club does not hold the reprint rights. The opinions expressed by the contributors of articles are their own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Boone and Crockett Club. Fair Chase (ISSN 1077-3274) is published for $35 per year by the Boone and Crockett Club, 250 Station Drive, Missoula, MT 59801. Periodical postage is paid in Missoula, Montana, and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to: Fair Chase, Boone and Crockett Club, 250 Station Drive, Missoula, MT 59801 Phone: (406) 542-1888 Fax: (406) 542-0784

NATIONAL ADVERTISING

BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOUNDED IN 1887 BY THEODORE ROOSEVELT CLUB

FAIR CHASE PRODUCTION STAFF

FOUNDATION

Foundation President – R. Terrell McCombs Secretary – John P. Schreiner Treasurer – C. Martin Wood III Vice President – John P. Evans Vice President – Paul M. Zelisko Class of 2018 Gary W. Dietrich B.B. Hollingsworth, Jr. Ned S. Holmes Tom L. Lewis Paul M. Zelisko Class of 2019 John P. Evans Steve J. Hageman R. Terrell McCombs John P. Schreiner C. Martin Wood III Class of 2020 Remo R. Pizzagalli Edward B. Rasmuson Benjamin A. Strickling III John A. Tomke Jeffrey A. Watkins

Danny Noonan Danny@Boone-Crockett.org Phone: (406)542-1888 ext. 205

B&C STAFF

Chief of Staff – Tony A. Schoonen Director of Big Game Records – Justin Spring Director of Publications – Julie L. Tripp Director of Marketing – Keith Balfourd Sales Manager – Danny Noonan Office Manager – Sandy Poston Controller – Abra Loran Assistant Controller – Debbie Kochel Assistant Director of Big Game Records– Kyle M. Lehr Development Program Manager – Jodi Bishop Digital Strategies Manager – Mark Mesenko Creative Services Manager – Karlie Slayer TRM Ranch Manager – Mike Briggs Conservation Education Programs Manager – Luke Coccoli Shipping and Administrative Support Specialist – Amy Hutchison Customer Service/Receptionist – TJ Gould

RX-1600i TBR/W

RX-1600i TBR/W HIGH-CONTRAST OLED DISPLAY TBR/W BALLISTIC TECHNOLOGY LIGHTWEIGHT AND RUGGED ALUMINUM CHASSIS WATERPROOF AND EXTREME CLIMATE TESTED

#BERELENTLESS

LEUPOLD.COM

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8

100 ISSUES OF FAIR CHASE We all know that one of the best ways to prevent getting lost in the boonies is to stop every so often and take a look back, to pinpoint a series of natural features— from a distant peak to a distinct rock formation, for example—that can serve as signposts on our return trip. In the fast-paced world we are living in today, however, it seems that most of us are only keeping an eye on what’s ahead instead of occasionally also looking in the rear view mirror. Fortunately, one of the individuals smart enough to glance back at the tracks we’ve made is our own Karlie Slayer, our Club’s creative services manager and the person who does the lion’s share of putting this magazine together every quarter. Karlie emailed me the other day to let me know that the 2018 winter edition of Fair Chase, the copy you’re reading right now, is the 100th

edition of the magazine. What a great milestone! To take a step back in time, the Club’s Associate Program was launched in 1985 and the first issue of the Associates Newsletter was sent out in February of 1986. In 1992, the Club officially put together an Associates Committee with Regular Member George Bettas as chairman. A year later, George hired Julie Tripp to help create and launch the first issue of Fair Chase, transforming the Associates Newsletter into a full-fledged magazine. As many of you know, Julie continues her outstanding career at B&C as the Club’s director of publications. The name Fair Chase was selected from 46 different titles proposed by Associates for the official publication of the Boone and Crockett Club. As noted in the first edition, new Associates, Chris Keenum of Hartselle, Alabama, and Don Moody of Gainesville, Texas, both proposed Fair Chase as

the new title. George Bettas took the reins as the editor of Fair Chase and Jack Reneau served as assistant editor along with his responsibilities as the director of the Club’s Big Game Records Program. The magazine has, of course, evolved over the years. In 2013, new operating guidelines were drawn up within the editorial board. As now stated by the Club, “Ethics, science, and thought leadership are now integrated with real-life adventure stories that exemplify the Club’s values in ways that our hunters can internalize and emulate. Humility, respect and competence have always been the cornerstone of the fair-chase hunter, and we would have that continue to be the norm in the future.” Writing about the new magazine, George Bettas noted, “The ethic of fair chase goes beyond where the laws go. It is the essence of hunting.

Doug Painter EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

It is the essence of conservation. It is the essence of man’s modern role in conserving environmental quality, biological diversity, and related quality wildlife populations and hunting opportunities. It is fitting that Fair Chase is the title of the official publication of the Boone and Crockett Club for fair chase is the essence of the Boone and Crockett Club.” Those words ring as true today as they did a quarter of a century ago. As Shakespeare so wisely reminded us in The Tempest, the past is, indeed, prologue. Hope to see you down the trail. n

It has been a great honor to be a small part of something as amazing as Fair Chase magazine. The contributors, editors, and readers keep this publication going at the highest level. Working on the new look for Fair Chase in 2015 (right) was a wonderful experience. Julie Tripp is a great supervisor, mentor, and friend. She has set the standard and I will continue to try to keep Fair Chase something everyone looks forward to receiving in their mailbox every quarter. - Karlie Slayer

Fair Chase Managing Editor

A Dall’s sheep graced the cover of the first issue of Fair Chase (left) in the winter of 1994, so it seemed fitting to have the same species on the cover of the 100th issue. All but four covers have been photos of wild, free-ranging animals in their natural habitat, something B&C takes pride in.

FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Read more about the History of Fair Chase magazine in the Spring 2018 issue of Fair Chase.

Elevation Adjustment

Windage Adjustment

KILO2400BDX™ SIG SAUER® Electro-Optics’s KILO2400BDX is the world’s most advanced laser rangefinder. Utilizing the onboard Applied Ballistic Ultralite calculator, the KILO2400BDX provides precise holdover information so you can dial in any riflescope with ease. Rangefinder: KILO2400BDX

For complete BDX capabilites see sigsauer.com

Reflective:

Trees:

Deer:

Up to 3400 yds

Up to 1800 yds

Up to 1400 yds

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8

IN THE ARENA With the Club’s many new activities in recent years, we should remember that we began as the first nationwide organization to concentrate efforts on conservation policy. That was 1888, more than a decade before Theodore Roosevelt became president of the United States and established conservation as a national issue. As we adapt to our role in the 21st century amid a growing partnership with many wildlife conservation organizations, we continue to lead precisely how we began: personal efforts by Club members, conducted quietly and effectively. Our efforts are steady and continually successful despite the turbulence of national politics. Several Club members traveled to Washington, D.C. to attend meetings September 4-6, 2018, with members of

Congress and to attend the annual banquet hosted by the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation. Led by Committee Co-Chairs Paul Phillips and James Cummins, and Chief of Staff Tony Schoonen, Club members Tim Brady, Jim Arnold, Morrie Stevens, and John Schreiner joined for several important meetings on Capitol Hill. In those meetings, the Club raised the alarm bells on the spread of Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) in deer and elk. The hunting community is alarmed that the spread of this disease could severely deplete deer and elk populations. A moratorium on interstate transportation of cervids is the only viable way to stop the spread of this disease until a certified live test can be identified. We are still studying the disease, and a live test is urgently needed.

FROM THE PRESIDENT

We have asked members of Congress to support a renewed review by United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service on their standards for interstate transport of deer and elk, as we believe the current standards can be greatly improved. We are also asking Congress to urge the Department of the Interior and USDA to form a national CWD task force to unite agency efforts with state and private efforts. Club members also offered a hearty “thank you” to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., Sen. Jon Tester D-Mont., and several representatives for including funding for the “recreational access” projects under the Land and Water Conservation Fund for the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. In the last

B&C Members attend the annual banquet hosted by the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation. FROM LEFT TO RIGHT: John Schreiner, James Cummins (Co-Chair, B&C Conservation Policy Committee), Tim Brady, Morrie Stevens, Josh Maxwell (House Committee on Agriculture), and Paul Phillips (Co-Chair, B&C Conservation Policy Committee).

B.B. Hollingsworth, Jr. PRESIDENT

six years, access projects have opened hundreds of thousands of acres of federal land for hunting and angling in western states in previously inaccessible locations. Both the Senate and House of Representatives have continued this funding ($12 million overall) in the pending appropriations bills for this access program. A win seems imminent for our D.C. team. The pending Farm Bill reauthorization in Congress presents another great opportunity for the Club to advance its agenda. Club members met with members of Congress and their staff to relay our priorities in the forestry and conservation titles. The Club noted its support for Farm Bill reforms in the House and Senate bills addressing challenges to forest management on federal lands. More U.S. Forest Service tools lead to improved wildlife habitat for at-risk species and increase the ability to meet management goals for early successional habitat. Cuts to conservation funding through the 2014 Farm Bill,

LEARN MORE: n

FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Read more about the Boone and Crockett Club’s involvement in Washington, D.C., on page 24. Working to Improve Forest Health, by James L. Cummins

previous appropriations bills, and sequestration have caused landowner demand to exceed supply. It is essential that the next Farm Bill does not further erode these valuable resources. The Club has also proudly engaged with the Departments of Interior and Agriculture. This Administration has made sportsmen’s issues a priority, particularly at Interior, where Secretary Zinke has promoted Pittman-Robertson funding, judiciously precluded certain mineral developments, and scrutinized national monuments for needless restrictions on hunting access. These actions advance the secretary’s clear message from his first day on the job that wildlife conservation is a priority. His “Day 1” secretarial orders reversed anti-gun policy and advanced specific action on Executive Order 13443 on Hunting Heritage and Wildlife Conservation, which was a major initiative of the Club. Since then, additional orders have established a big game corridor conservation initiative and directed more hunting and fishing opportunities. In September, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finalized the expansion of

hunting access at 30 National Wildlife Refuges, approximately 250,000 new acres. With a refuge within an hour’s drive of most major American metropolitan areas providing for more than 53 million visitors a year, refuges provide exceptional hunting opportunities. Refuges also support a $2.4 billion recreation industry, making them structurally important to the American economy. The Club applauds Secretary Zinke and President Trump for their commitment to the conservation community and looks forward to continuing our work with them to expand hunting access on federal lands. The Club weighed in favorably with Secretary Zinke on his plan to reorganize the Department of the Interior. Our support is no criticism of the department’s workforce or work ethic, of which many of us have ourselves been part of during our careers. We support the department and are committed to its continuous improvement on a mission we share both professionally and personally. Improvement means pressing for more efficiency, effectiveness, and decisional authority at the field level; better coordination and cooperation

among federal, state, and local entities; and aligning work responsibilities with the ecology and socio-economics of communities. This will set the stage for collaboration among people focused on issues at appropriate scales. Overall, we are proud to say that we work effectively with elected and appointed officials of both parties as they come and go in office and as majorities in Congress and control of the White House shift. As I review this record, I’m reminded that the new frontier is to implement this same sort of work in state legislatures and agencies, where issues such as CWD are playing out. My vision is that in the coming years the Club will help lead the community back in this direction as we continue to play our role nationally. I would be remiss here if I did not recognize the fine work our Washington team performs for the Club. Greg Schildwachter, David Anderson, and Mitch Butler are well respected and carry the gospel of Boone and Crockett in D.C. in fine fashion. Thank you, gentlemen. n

Improvement means pressing for more efficiency, effectiveness, and decisional authority at the field level; better coordination and cooperation among federal, state, and local entities; and aligning work responsibilities with the ecology and socio-economics of communities. This will set the stage for collaboration among people focused on issues at appropriate scales.

The Boone and Crockett Club asks that you please thank our Trailblazers with your patronage. FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8

A CLASH BETWEEN PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT AND THE LAW While serving as the director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) in the early 2000s, I was involved in the attempt to delist gray wolves in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE). Much of that effort involved working with state agencies and legislatures to develop state management plans that would conform to federal and state laws and provide adequate regulatory mechanisms to permit states to manage wolf populations within their borders. The goal was to develop management plans that would preclude the need for Endangered Species Act (ESA) protection. We were unable to achieve wolf delisting due to a number of issues, mostly surrounding the legal requirements that accompanied a delisting final rule. With my education and training as a biologist, legal decisions often seemed at odds with sound science and resource management decisions. From a purely biological perspective, wolf numbers assured sustainable populations throughout the range of the GYE. State agencies clearly had the expertise to monitor and manage wolf numbers within their borders. However, legal issues associated with the ESA, ESA rules and regulations, and court decisions stymied our best attempts at delisting. Professional judgment and the court decisions seemed to clash again and again. It is through this lens that I tried to understand the recent September 24, 2018, decision negating the FWS’s 10 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

attempt to delist grizzly bears in the GYE. Grizzly bears in the Lower 48 states were listed as a threatened species in 1975. At that time, there were six separate populations, all of which lived in portions of Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Washington, and British Columbia. Today, the majority of grizzly bears reside in the GYE and Northern Continental Divide areas. In 2007, in recognition of the grizzly bear’s population numbers in the GYE, the FWS attempted to delist that population. This decision was made using the best scientific information available. From a policy perspective, it also addressed the concerns of legislators, private landowners, ranchers, and hunters within the GYE area. That decision was remanded back to the agency because of concerns about the grizzly bear’s whitepine bark seed diet and another issue that continues to perplex the FWS. In 2017, the FWS made a second attempt to delist the GYE population. In their final rule, the FWS addressed the whitepine bark seed issue but was confounded again because of the geographic specificity of the delisting attempt. Grizzly bears and gray wolves were originally listed (1975 and 1974 respectfully) as species throughout the entirety of their ranges in the Lower 48 states. Those listing decisions were made prior to an ESA amendment in 1978 that permitted the FWS to “sparingly use” distinct population segments (DPS). The use of DPS would provide a tool for the FWS to carve out specific

geographic populations within a species’ range which required protection under the ESA. It recognized that viable populations could occur within the species’ range that did not need protection, while other populations might need special protection—a useful, common-sense approach to wildlife management. However, prior to 1978, if a species was originally listed throughout its entire range, it could only be delisted throughout the species’ entire range, not as a DPS. The FWS argued that DPS status was appropriate for delisting both grizzly bears and gray wolves, but the courts disagreed in each delisting attempt. At issue was the ability for individual movement and genetic exchange among populations within the entire range. Grizzly bears in the GYE have not interbred with those in the Northern Continental Divide area presumably since the 1800s or early 1900s, prior to their decimation by early wilderness settlers. The courts declared that the FWS must consider the impact of delisting a specific population (GYE) on the viability of other existing populations within the grizzly range. Another complication involved the means of population estimation— past, present, and future— and its repercussions on required species status reviews going forward. Although the courts and the FWS recognized the states’ ability to provide adequate regulatory mechanisms to sustain the survival of these species, the courts did not

CAPITOL COMMENTS

Steven Williams, Ph.D. B&C PROFESSIONAL MEMBER PRESIDENT Wildlife Management Institute

provide that authority. Instead they based their decisions on existing laws and case law that continue ESA protections for grizzly bears and gray wolves. State fish and wildlife managers have been continually frustrated in the process. This layman’s description of the issues surrounding delisting decisions was intended to make two points. One, the FWS operates under legal constraints that are not well understood by most people, including some responsible for species’ management. Two, Congress has the ability to address the DPS provision in order to provide a scientifically justified and common-sense approach to managing species at a much finer scale than is currently available. The FWS and state agencies have demonstrated their assurance of the long-term survival of species through established expertise, longterm commitment, financial contributions, and existing regulatory mechanisms. The public demands species’ protections and flexibility in application of the law. We need to learn from our past experience when considering amendments to the ESA. n

R E M I W A R R E N @ U A H U N T

Under ArmourÂŽ

Barren Camo

Under ArmourÂŽ Barren Camo is built with a color palette that works best in locations absent of abundant foliage and deciduous forests. These environments would include, but are not limited to, high desert, rocky, mountainous terrain, sage fields, and vast desert. In the colder months this pattern has also proven to be effective in deciduous forests, after the leaves have dropped for the season.

Innovation is our adaptation.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 11

“THE BOY SCOUT MOVEMENT IS DISTINCTLY AN ASSET TO OUR COUNTRY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF EFFICIENCY, VIRILITY, AND GOOD CITIZENSHIP. It is essential that its leaders be men of strong, wholesome character; of unmistakable devotion to our country, its customs and ideals, as well as in soul and by law citizens thereof, whose wholehearted loyalty is given to this nation, and to this nation alone.”

– THEODORE ROOSEVELT

12 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

A message brought to you by

PG. 36 MOHAB BY LUKE COCCOLI

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 13

CRAIG BODDINGTON PROFESSIONAL MEMBER Photos Courtesy of Author

ACCURATE HUNTER RANGING, RANGEFINDERS, AND TRAJECTORY COMPENSATION

When stationary, it’s common to use the range finder to check distances to reference points. First guess the distance, then range it. Over time, this will greatly improve one’s ability to estimate range by eye, still a most valuable skill!

14 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Laser range finders are wonderful, but the eye-safe lasers required by law (and safety!) cannot burn through precipitation or fog. On a day like this, you need to know how to estimate range the old-fashioned way—by eye!

Like it or not, hunters

are taking game at longer ranges than we used to consider practical and sensible—and some shots are being taken at much longer ranges. Long-range shooting is hardly new. Long-range competition was popular in the 19th century, but field shooting at longer ranges was unusual. The accuracy was there, and optics, though less common, existed. Telescopes, binoculars, and riflescopes saw use in our Civil War, and a few of the bison hunters (including Colonel Richard Dodge) used scoped rif les. But there’s a big difference between a target on a surveyed “known distance” range and an animal standing “somewhere out there.” Optics have come a long way in my lifetime! The compact laser range finder didn’t even exist until I was nearly 40, and now it’s a major category in sport optics. Today’s range finders even measure the uphill/downhill angles and yield the horizontal distance. Leupold pioneered this with its TBR (True Ballistic Range), but a number of current range finders offer this feature. The modern laser range finder is accurate, compact, and amazingly inexpensive. Several firms also incorporate range finders into

binoculars. It is extremely handy to have both tools in one unit, but good range-finder binoculars are costly, plus they are heavier than binoculars-only. Plus, it’s an engineering limitation that incorporating the range finder slightly reduces the brightness and clarity. So, there are tradeoffs, but some type of laser range finder is now standard equipment for serious hunters. Remembering hunting without a range finder is like a trip back in time. We made the best “guesstimates” we could! Sometimes it worked, but since it was a lot of trouble to pace off shooting distances it was simpler to believe our guesstimates. I suspect many of the “500yard shots” I read about when I was a kid included some exaggeration. The laser range finder has essentially removed distance as a variable. There is a caution here: Laser range finders work poorly in any precipitation, so it’s good to maintain the dying art of judging range by eye. The range finder is a great tool for this. When I’m set up glassing, or when I get to an unfamiliar deer stand, I range all manner of reference points, committing distances to memory. Instead, play a guessing game: Look at a rock or tree, guess how far it is, and then range it. Over time your guesses will get better—useful when weather or time don’t allow ranging. Most of the time, we don’t have to worry about distance like we used to. We must know the trajectory of our cartridge and bullet; armed with that knowledge we can adjust the hold. In this area, there hasn’t been much progress. In 1915 the .250 Savage was the first commercial cartridge to reach 3,000 feet per second (fps). A century later 3,000 fps is still considered fast. Better bullet aerodynamics have flattened trajectories slightly, but improvements are incremental. We “cheat” gravity by zeroing so our bullet slants upward to cross the line

of sight at close range, continues to rise a bit, and then gravity takes over and the bullet starts to drop, crossing the line of sight again. This downward curve continues and grows steeper as air resistance reduces velocity. Some of us sight-in “dead on” at 100 yards. Many, as Jack O’Connor advocated, zero a couple inches high at 100 yards; others pick a set distance for that second crossing of the line of sight, whether 200, 250, or (with very fast cartridges), possibly 300 yards. For hunting it’s rare to zero farther because the rise of the trajectory is such that you must consciously aim low at shorter ranges to avoid shooting too high. The reality is that, even with our fastest and flattest-shooting cartridges, with any sensible zero you must start to aim high to compensate for trajectory before you get to 350 yards. At whatever distance you must start to aim high, trajectory becomes just a number. As long as you know the range and the bullet drop at that range (the “number”), and ignoring factors such as wind and wobbles, you can make hits. The guesstimate method for compensating for wind deflection has long been called “Kentucky windage,” done by instinct and experience. Looking through a plain scope reticle or through open sights and adjusting for trajectory drop could be called “Kentucky elevation.” Let’s say, with a 200-yard zero, your 130-grain .270 bullet drops 20 inches at 400 yards. You think the deer in your area are 18 inches from brisket to backbone. You want to hit about a third up on the shoulder so you need to hold eight inches over the backline. Hunters have done this for generations, and it has long worked. Except that you can’t run out there and measure the buck before you shoot. In any species some animals are bigger than others, and some are smaller. And, do you really know what eight inches of air looks like through your reticle at 400 yards? FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 15

Today we have a myriad of reticles with additional aiming points on the vertical crosshair below the central intersection. There are many systems, and the spacing varies: There can be stadia lines or hashmarks, while Nikon has a reticle with circles. Then there’s the “mil dot” reticle with a series of dots on the vertical wire. Although standardized by NATO, “mil” doesn’t mean military; it’s short for “milliradian,” an angular measurement of 1/6400 of a degree. The dots can vary in size, but on a mildot reticle, the space between the dots should subtend (cover) 3.6 inches at 100 yards and 36 inches at 1,000 yards. I’ll be honest: I commanded snipers but have no sniper training. I never learned mil-dots and have no intention of learning now! But, whatever system you choose to become familiar with, additional aiming points on the reticle offers a far better way of accurately judging holdover. Exact size of the target no longer matters, and you are using a firm aiming point rather than guessing “x” inches over the backline. Again, there are many different reticles, and larger optics companies offer multiple options. Some are simple and others complex. I don’t like a lot of distracting clutter in the reticle, so I try to keep it simple. As simple as it gets, yet effective and versatile, is Leupold’s “Boone and Crockett reticle,” with just a few additional stadia lines. I’ve had good success with it, but I’ve also done a lot of hunting with Zeiss’s Rapid-Z—more complex but workable. It took time to get used to it, but I used it for a number of my Asian sheep and goats, including several shots between 400 and 500 yards. Regardless of system, the exact distances at which the additional aiming point will be valid varies 16 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

with the cartridge and load. Computer ballistics programs get you close, but there’s no substitute for shooting at actual distances to verify your data. Don’t e x p e c t round numbers! Right now, I’m working with Zeiss’s new ZMOA-2 reticle, with hashmarks on both vertical and horizontal wires (the latter for wind compensation). I input the bullet, velocity, and climatic data, into the Zeiss Hunting App and it yielded me a chart for my .300 Weatherby Magnum loads with 200-grain ELD-X bullet. With a 200-yard zero, the first four stadia lines should be valid at 297, 381, 458, and 530 yards. Since game animals rarely stand on measured yard lines, the random numbers don’t really matter. You know the range, so you use the stadia line valid at a distance closest to the actual range, then hold slightly high or low. The ability to put an aiming point on the animal is much more precise than aiming somewhere in outer space. But you can only have so many aiming points in a reticle, and as distance increases, the values will be farther apart, requiring ever more extrapolation. There is another way of doing it, developed by longrange competitors, proven by our snipers, and generally preferred by today’s growing group of extreme-range shooters. This option is, of course, dialing the correction on the scope’s elevation turret. Then, with the correction dialed in, you simply hold where you want to hit using the crosshair intersection. This sounds like the most precise system for trajectory compensation, and it probably is—but there are pros and cons. In the next column we’ll delve into the question of whether to “dial or hold.” n

TOP: Leupold’s “B&C reticle” is simple and uncluttered; in this illuminated version, it offers three stadia lines, plus the top of the bottom “Duplex” post offers a fourth aiming point. Valid yardages for each stadia line vary with your bullet and velocity. MIDDLE: Verifying computergenerated data at Zack Aultman’s range in Georgia, with targets to 500 yards. Many shooters have problems getting access to long-range targets. This is a limitation; in order to shoot in the field at longer ranges, data must be verified at actual ranges. BOTTOM: Laser range finders like the Leupold, center, are accurate, compact, and inexpensive. The Leica Geovid, left, was the original range finder-binocular, cumbersome but effective. Newer range finder-binoculars (right) are more compact but still heavier and more costly than stand-alone units.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 17

WAYNE C. VAN ZWOLL B&C PROFESSIONAL MEMBER Photos Courtesy of Author

An Assist from

Finland A hunter prowls a Colorado rim in a squall, much as Doug Burris did before killing a World’s Record mule deer with his Sako in .264 Winchester Magnum in 1972.

Until the shot, he’d been still-hunting

the rim of a Colorado canyon; his plan to pause on a plateau to the north. This part of the San Juan Forest comprised mostly oak brush and held some fine mule deer. But the rifle’s report ahead changed his agenda. At a run, he headed for his chosen vantage point. Moments later, scrambling up onto the plateau, he spied movement across the canyon. At 250 yards, the biggest buck he’d ever seen was making for cover. “I put the crosshairs on his back and touched off my Sako .264.” The hand-loaded 125-grain Nosler hit home, dropping the deer instantly. Wisely, the hunter watched for several minutes before crossing the canyon. Then he raced to his prize. The giant rack had 18 points and measured 41 inches outside—“a record-book buck, I was sure!” The score would fall just shy of Boone and Crockett’s minimum for listing, but those numbers hardly disillusioned him. He would return to this place. Clearly, it held extraordinary deer!

18 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Since 1946, these rifles have earned plaudits far from their Scandinavian home. Even in the Rockies.

A Tikka brought this young lady’s Namibian safari to a successful close with a fine red hartebeest.

He would carry the same rifle too. Visit hunting camps in the western U.S., and you’ll find them awash in Winchester Model 70s and Remington 700s. By the late 1940s, when reliable, fogproof scopes appeared, iron-sighted lever rifles were rapidly giving way to bolt-actions. In the early ‘70s, when Doug shot his 18-pointer, some hunters still carried converted Springfields and Mausers. But affordable, scope-friendly commercial sporters would proliferate, while stocks of surplus infantry rifles diminished. Nationwide, most hunters favored familiar domestic brands, in part because they knew less about imported rifles. Sakos hailed from Riihimaki, Finland, and while they had earned plaudits since Stoeger brought the first of them across the Atlantic in 1946, they were expensive. Also, the advent of short-belted magnums in the 1940s and ‘50s headlined American names. Weatherby had pioneered with his .257, .270 and 7mm. Winchester’s .458, .338, .264 and .300, and Remington’s 7mm, arrived between 1956 and ‘63. Norma introduced its .308 and .358 Magnums in 1960 and ‘61; but loaded ammunition came later—at high prices. In the U.S., Browning’s fine High Power was the only widely known rifle to chamber those two. Sako was quick to add chambering reamers for Winchester and Remington magnums. It drew the attention of rifle buffs like Doug. The .264 cartridge, too, appealed mainly to enthusiasts. Advertised at its 1959 debut as a brimstone-breathing deer/varmint round that shot flat and teased 3,700 fps from 100-grain bullets, it sold poorly. Gun scribes wailed that it ate throats; deer and predator hunters shied from its loud bark and sharp recoil. What could it do that a .243 wouldn’t do more civilly? Three years later Remington cleverly hawked its 7mm Magnum as a deer/elk round with heavier bullets. In truth, these magnums are nearly identical in shape and capacity, neck diameters differing by just .020!

The Sako ‘06 Wayne used here is a “loaner” rifle for safari clients. It has taken many, many animals.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 19

TOP: This Sako’s petite action is ideally suited to the .222. Its forebears were the first Sakos, circa 1946. MIDDLE: Long-action Sakos come in laminated, synthetic and walnut stocks. Here: a .416 Remington, walnut. BOTTOM: Wayne punched this three-shot group with a Tikka T3 in 7mm Magnum. It’s not unusual for a T3!

20 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

I like the .264, have long thought it was unfairly maligned. Hand-loaded 140-grain bullets pushed by IMR 7828 scoot from my Model 70 and commercial Mauser at 3,300 fps with no strain. That’s 100 fps faster than initial factory claims, nearly 300 fps above revised listings! New 6.5mm bullets make this neglected cartridge not only better for big game, but a sterling choice for elk in open country. I digress. Sako chambered for U.S. loads, new and old, popular and not, because it was keen to make customers of American hunters. Suojeluskuntain Yliesikunnan Asepaja was established April 1, 1919. Its founders decided “Sako” was easier to pronounce (pronunciation is “Socko,” by the way, not “Sayko”). The firm’s first rifle of note, the lovely Vixen, appeared shortly after the close of WW II in .22 Hornet and .218 Bee—both American smallbore cartridges. A heavy-barrel version and a full-stocked carbine quickly followed. So did .222, .222 Magnum and .223 chamberings. In 1957, Sako expanded its rifle line with the L-57 Forester. Its action was upsized for the thennew .308 and .243 Winchester, the .22-250 joining as a factory round after Remington gave it a home in 1965. The L-57 came in sporter, carbine and heavy barrel versions. Three years later the L-61 Finnbear arrived, its action long enough for the .25-06, .270 and .30-06, short-belted magnums of the day, even the .375 H&H. L-61 rifles also appeared in carbine form, rare now on the secondhand market. In 1961 Sako introduced the Finnwolf, a hammerless lever-action rif le with a front-locking bolt, a detachable magazine and a one-piece stock. In .243 and .308, it lasted a decade. Its successor, the similar Model 73, went away in the mid-‘70s. By that time Sako

had been eight years under new owners and was redesigning its bolt guns. The Model 74 in three action lengths replaced the Vixen, Forester and Finnbear from 1974 until 1978. Then came the “A series”—A1, A11 and A111—short, medium and long receivers. In the mid‘80s, Sako replaced that group with the Hunter, also in three action lengths and with a lefthand option. The Model 78 rimfire was shipping by that time, in .22 Hornet as well as .22 Long Rifle. The first Sakos wore hand-checkered walnut stocks. Beginning in the late 1950s they had glossy finish— as did the highly polished chrome-moly steel. Carefully bedded, Sako rifles were soon renowned for their fine accuracy, adjustable triggers and silky bolt travel. Riflemen weren’t as sweet on the dovetail receiver rails that required costly Sako scope rings. The extractor was much smaller than the 98 Mauser’s, but so reliable it would later be copied as a replacement for bolt-face claws. In 1993 Sako introduced the TRG rifle for longrange shooters. In sporting and tactical form, it had a three-lug bolt with a detachable box. Chambered to .338 Lapua in the Model 42 action and .308 in the more compact Model 22, the TRG would later sire the sophisticated Model 10. In 1997 a new hunting rifle appeared. The Model 75’s three locking lugs, a departure from the traditional twin lugs, reduced bolt lift to 70 degrees. A notable and controversial feature was its lockable bolt. The twist of a key in the bolt shroud rendered the rifle inoperable (or safe, if you prefer the euphemism). Four receiver lengths accepted a staple of 18 cartridges, .17 Remington and .22 PPC to 9.3x62 and .340 Weatherby. Rifle configurations included a walnut-stocked Battue with

a quarter-rib on a 19-inch barrel. Like the TRG, the 75 had integral top rails dovetailed for Sako’s Optilock mounts. I recall using rifles from Riihimaki at a Finnish rifle range under skies as grim as the visage of the fellow running the targets. “Standing and moving,” boomed the Finn, wasting no English. “At the signal.” My crosswire bobbed against a black, implacable paper moose 80 meters away. Then: the buzzer. Bang! I ran the bolt, fired again. Too slow! I managed a third with two seconds remaining. Mercifully, the scoreboard blinked a 9 and two 10s. “Now moving.” On electronic legs, the moose backed behind a barricade. With sweaty palms, I waited. Suddenly it shot along the rail. Stay on the dewlap! Keep it level! Fire fast! The rifle bucked just before the moose vanished into the hill. On its return my swing got away. Two final shots, as the moose sped left and right, broke well. Sadly, neither could atone for my one miss

Announced in 2003, the T3 is a cleverly designed, modestly priced rifle with accurate Sako barrels.

in front. “You must repeat,” ordered the Finn, as if telling a child to pick up his socks. I’d get no charity here. My next volley landed obligingly inside the scoring rings. I was now qualified to hunt in Finland. Local logic: If you’re a hunter, you must prove you can shoot like one before entering the woods. The Model 85 announced in 2006 was less a new rifle than a $220 upgrade of the Model 75, with a redesigned stock and magazine latch. It has a mechanical ejector, a tab in front of the sliding two-detent safety to release the bolt for secure cycling. Triggers adjust down to 2¼ pounds. The detachable box on my favorite model, the 85 Kodiak in .375 H&H, must be nudged up to release the latch, a clever way to prevent accidental drops without slowing reloads. Crossbolts reinforce the laminated stock either end of the .375’s fourshot magazine—which can be topped off through the rifle’s generous port. Hooray! Described as a “controlled-round feed” action, the 85’s falls short of meeting the

standard set by the 1898 Mauser. That is, it won’t prevent a jam if, with a cartridge on the bolt face, you shortstroke the bolt. But it is a strong, smooth-cycling, reliable action that all but dares you to attempt a jam, whether you choose a top-loading three-shot magazine or a detachable box. Stocks are of carbon fiber on the Model 85 Carbonlight Stainless, walnut on classsic and iron-sighted Bavarian versions and laminated wood on the Grey Wolf, Varmint, Long Range and Kodiak. Hammer-forged barrels deliver on Sako’s MOA accuracy guarantee across a broad range of chamberings. A .375 gives me sub-minute knots with Federal 260-grain AccuBond loads. Sako introduced the A-7 bolt rifle in 2009. Two action lengths permitted chamberings from .22-250 to .300 Winchester. Instead of Sako dovetails, it had Weaver-style scope bases. Dropped in 2011, the A-7 was resurrected as the A-7 Roughneck three years later. It offers hunters a less costly push-fed rifle in long range, coyote and big game renditions. Alloy-reinforced synthetic stocks cradle fluted barrels in the most popular dozen of the 85’s chamberings. Concurrent revamping of the Model 78 rimfire resulted in Sako’s Finnfire II. This box-fed, twin-lug rifle in .22 LR and .17 HMR has a checkered walnut stock, a single-set trigger that adjusts to two pounds. Receiver dovetails accept common scope rings. An understudy rifle for hunters who get too little practice with their centerfires! Over the last three decades Sako has brooked stiff competition—much of it, oddly enough, from another Finnish brand under its own roof. Tikka predates Sako by 26 years, its manufacturing roots reaching into Finland’s tenure as Grand Duchy of

Russia. During WW II, Tikka built sewing machines and sub-machine guns. After armistice, it began producing Models 55 and 65 hunting rifles and Models 17, and then 77 shotguns. In 1983 Tikka collaborated with Sako on the Model 555 bolt rifle. That venture prompted Sako’s acquisition of Tikka—along with Valmet and its six decades of experience building over/under shotguns. By 1989, production at Tikka’s Tikkakoski Works had moved to Sako’s Riihimaki factory, while Sako-Valmet Oy, Tourula had begun assembling shotguns in Italy. A new Tikka T3 bolt rifle appeared in 2003. It sold well from the start, even stateside. Excellent design, high-quality components (including Sako barrels) and a list price of just $549 made it irresistible! The twin-lug bolt, with four major components easily separated by hand, is as delightful for its simplicity as for its smooth travel. And it boasts the 70-degree lift of a three-lug Sako! The trigger adjusts from two to four pounds, with a hex key through the magazine well. The T3 is slimmer than its forebear, the Whitetail, sold in the U.S. from 1999. But the receiver is as stiff, because the ejection port is smaller. Two bolt stops adapt it to short and long cartridges. Rails accept 17mm clamp rings, albeit the rifle is drilled and tapped. Cartridges strip from a sturdy, lightweight polymer box. The recoil lug is a steel stock insert that engages a receiver slot. Eight versions come in chamberings from .204 Ruger to .300 Winchester. The T3 is one of few rifles still offered in .222 Remington, a fetching cartridge that during my youth piled up benchrest aggregates when it wasn’t dusting foxes, crows and woodchucks. In 2016 Tikka refined the T3 action, dubbing it the FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 21

Homeland While Sako, Tikka and the ammunition firm Lapua have brought Finland to the attention of U.S. shooters, it’s otherwise a little-known country. Swedish missionaries explored this rugged region as early as 1155 and established Finland as a Swedish protectorate, which it remained until 1809. Surrendered to Russia, it was proclaimed a Grand Duchy by the Czar. Finland became an independent republic in 1919, Sako’s debut year. Uneasy peace between Finland and the U.S.S.R. ended when the Soviet Army invaded during the winter of 1939-40. Hard fighting ensued while the Nazis pummeled Europe. Finns lost land to the Soviets but kept their independence. Hostilities ended in 1944. Eighty percent of Finland is timbered, and 30 percent of its exports are forest products. Woodland and modest farms support herds of whitetail deer, descendants of six animals brought from Minnesota in 1934. By 1960 Finns had begun hunting deer; now they kill 17,500 annually. Finland’s only large native predator, the wolf, was considered a threat to children and livestock. It was trapped and shot to extinction by the end of the 19th century. Hunting in Finland is highly regulated, the game managed by 300 state-sanctioned hunting groups that at the time of my latest visit comprised 2,370 clubs and 140,000 members. A Central Association of Hunters administers 15 conservation districts. While you needn’t be a club member to hunt, members get access to the best places. The country’s 300,000 moose hunters contribute a great deal to its economy; 84 percent of the 10 million kg (22 million pounds) of game meat sold annually in Finland is from moose!

NOTE: Beretta now handles Sako and Tikka sales stateside at beretta.com.

22 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

T3x. Additional tapped holes provide more scope-mounting options. A larger port makes single loading easier. Modular moldings at wrist and forend let you change grip dimensions. All T3s I’ve fired have been sweethearts. The 19-inch barrel on a .308 carbine nipped groups as snug as .70, and averaged .86 with five types of ammo! Tikkas in .270 and 7mm Magnum kept their shots almost as tight. Bolt-strokes have that greased-piston feel; triggers break like glass rods. Afield, T3s are nimble and sunrise-reliable. One cold morning, a Norwegian hound keen on a track through Scandinavian forest all but passed by another moose. I fired offhand, the Oryx softnose from my .300 punching steam from the off-side. The animal spun, staggered and fell. On another hunt, a bull galloped across my front, through brush too thick for a shot. But by great good luck an alley opened just as he paused on a rise 90 yards off. Again offhand, I fired. Down he went. We finished that trip hunting whitetails. (Introduced in the 1930s, these deer have thrived in Finland.) My T3 felled a doe at 220 yards, drawing mixed reactions from the Finns, who consider 150 a long poke. The overwhelming preference of Scandinavian hunters, Sako and Tikka rifles have become hits world-wide. A Scottish gamekeeper told me they’re his favorites. At one of Namibia’s most celebrated safari camps, they await clients traveling without rifles. Doug couldn’t have known that in 1972, when he readied his .264 Magnum for a fourth journey to the Colorado

plateau that had yielded his 18-point buck. The 22-hour drive from Texas spun out fast. The four hunters herded their Power Wagon, towing a Jeep, to their public-land campsite and quickly set up the tents. Opening morning, a gunmetal sky spit lightly. By nightfall two big bucks hung in camp. A heavy-racked animal had eluded Doug. Drizzle greeted him next morning. Climbing along the rim of a familiar canyon, he spied two fine deer “1,000 yards ahead.” For an hour and a half he eased toward them, through oak brush thick and tall enough to deny him another view. Closing, he spooked a doe that crashed away toward the bucks. Though he couldn’t see them, Doug knew he had run out of options. He dashed ahead to an opening and threw the Sako to cheek as the bucks bounded away. But now there was a third, even bigger than the others! At 300 yards, Doug’s Nosler ripped through that deer’s chest. The buck faltered, then fell. Typical in form, the antlers were high and wide, impossibly deep forks making the heavy beams appear almost thin. The animal’s body matched their scale. Not until they were scored did Doug Burris know that with one shot from his Sako he’d taken a world’s record deer. In March 1974, it easily earned top billing at the Boone and Crockett Awards Banquet. It was also given the coveted Sagamore Hill Award reserved for trophies of great distinction. Rifles from Finland have accounted for plenty of game since, but perhaps none more memorable! n

Sleek, accurate, well balanced, with intelligently designed internals, the T3 has become a top seller.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 23

WORKING TO IMPROVE FO Love It to Death is the third album

More people are engaging in and having a greater influence on natural resource issues than ever before, which is a good thing. People want to do what is best, yet they are not necessarily familiar with what that is. There is a growing belief that “letting nature take its course” with no human interference is the best philosophy for managing natural resources. Many people are mistakenly or intentionally calling this way of thinking conservation, though it is more closely aligned with preservation. These misconceptions are helping to shift the management of wildlife and its habitat from a “hands-on” conservation approach to a “hands-off” preservation approach that has serious, negative implications, such as the wildfires we have witnessed across the United States. Imagine if we approached healthcare for humans the same way we approached the health of our natural resources. Our life expectancy would be cut by at least a third. Relatively simple surgeries would be no longer. So, our quality of life would suffer. Is that what we want? Many people certainly do not. Conservation and preservation are both concerned with the betterment of the environment, and both are important. Conservation focuses on using and managing natural resources to benefit people, such as thinning a stand of ponderosa pine. Preservation is a philosophy that generally seeks to keep natural resources in a pristine state by excluding management and limiting how they are used by people, such as the giant sequoia. Conservation is the overarching concept with preservation being one of many management options within a broad conservation approach.

All of us working on forest policy understand that conservation can reverse these forest conditions outlined above through a variety of actions, such as harvesting trees and using controlled burns to mimic natural disturbances. These disturbances reduce buildups of forest litter (fuel) and overgrowth to encourage a variety of successional stages for wildlife, biodiversity, and the prevention of larger, hotter, more devastating fires from occurring that can destroy even old-growth forests. 24 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Through the use of environmentally smart thinning, prescribed burns and other scientifically validated management practices, overstocked forests can be returned to a natural balance, reducing the risks of catastrophic wildfire and insect and disease infestations along with the associated expenditure of dollars.

by the Alice Cooper band, which was released in 1971. Loving it to death is how we, as a nation, seem to be treating much of our public lands, especially our national forests.

OREST HEALTH THE PROBLEM

In August 2017, over 650,000 acres were burning in the Western U.S. At about the same time, over 150,000 acres of the Okefenokee Swamp burned in Georgia. That same year, my home state of Mississippi experienced 2,775 wildfires. And we all remember the images on the news when California was on fire. Most of these fires were on public lands, particularly federal lands. Across the nation, evacuations were taking place, structures were being burned, people were breathing hazardous air, federal and state resources were stretched thin, and many state agencies were out of money. More than 60 million acres of national forests are at high risk of wildfire or in need of restoration. In the past 10 years, over 65 million acres have burned. Approximately 10 million acres burned in 2015, killing 11 firefighters. Federal foresters estimate that an astounding 190 million acres of land managed by the departments of Agriculture and the Interior are at an unnatural risk to catastrophic wildfire.

On our national forests alone, since 2000, wildfires average 6.9 million acres burned annually. In 1995, fire made up 16 percent of those agencies’ annual appropriated budgets. In 2015, fire made up 52 percent of their appropriated budget. That is a decrease of 36 percent in funds that would be used for other activities, including research, forest and wildlife habitat improvements and maintenance. What caused this wildfire phenomenon? Why, over the course of the last two decades, have wildfires intensified to the point of being natural disasters? What are the impacts on the people, landscape, wildlife, economies, and state and federal budgets and personnel? What can be done to correct this destructive situation going forward? These are the questions the Boone and Crockett Club asked itself early in 2017. National forests comprise a large segment of the ecosystems in the United States. Most have evolved with fires, insect and disease outbreaks and blow-downs to retain biodiversity and forest health. But times have clearly

changed. More people are living further out into wildland-urban interfaces. To protect lives and homes, this has logically led to a forest policy of suppressing natural fires and insect outbreaks. This intolerance of fires combined with decades of relying on our forests for timber production and then dramatically scaling this back, have helped produce very “unnatural” conditions of fuel buildup ripe for the wildfires we have been seeing. These unnatural conditions are resulting in wildfires that are destroying human lives, forests, wildlife habitat, and homes and contributing to a changing climate. Wildfires emit carbon that contributes to poor air quality. Healthy forests, as well as forest products, are a carbon sink, sequestering carbon that would otherwise be emitted into the atmosphere.

JAMES L. CUMMINS VICE-PRESIDENT AND CO-CHAIR B&C CONSERVATION COMMITTEE

Bob Model of Wyoming and Steve Mealey of Oregon, in 2002 and 2003. These gentlemen and the Club helped push the Healthy Forests Restoration Act through Congress. The legislation was born out of President George W. Bush’s Healthy Forests Initiative. I was working on the act trying to make sure it helped solve forest problems in the Southeast. Paul Phillips, also of Oregon, was leading the way on the public relations and messaging side. David Anderson was working on this issue with the White House Council on Environmental Quality. He is now a government relations specialist for the Club. Paul and I currently co-chair the Club’s Conservation Policy Committee, and he, David and

THE SOLUTION

The Boone and Crockett Club has been working for decades on this issue. My first experience working on it was when the Club’s Conservation Policy Committee was chaired by

This intolerance of fires combined with decades of relying on our forests for timber production and then dramatically scaling this back, have helped produce very “unnatural” conditions of fuel buildup ripe for the wildfires we have been seeing. FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 25

In order to leave the next generation of Americans a national forest system that is in the best health possible, we need to make sure it has the best care possible.

26 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

growing areas to meet much of the demand for wood products while allowing less intensive management over the majority of the forested landscape. This enhances biodiversity while localizing the impacts of our demands for these products. We have the ability to locate and manage intensive industries (such as energy development) and urban growth so that it aids conservation—consolidating daily life and extractive industries in some places allows other places to produce the benefits of wilderness, scenery, and wildlife habitat. Ma naging forests makes them resilient and able to withstand fire, pests, and diseases. Management eliminates or reduces the impact of catastrophic wildfire; protects riparian areas important for stream health (shade, filtering, etc.) and fish species such as trout; and protects water quality due to fires followed by rains washing sediments downstream and damaging important drinking water supplies. Using 21st century techniques by land management professionals—and not direct mail specialists and litigators—we have the technology and knowhow to restore America’s cherished landscapes back to a healthy, natural condition. Through the use of environmentally smart thinning, prescribed burns and other scientifically validated management practices, overstocked forests can be returned to a natural balance, reducing the risks of catastrophic wildfire and

insect and disease infestations along with the associated expenditure of dollars. Pure preservation is not working in many places. In order to leave the next generation of Americans a national forest system that is in the best health possible, we need to make sure it has the best care possible. FOREST REFORM LEGISLATION

The Boone and Crockett Club has a long history in forest management. The Club was instrumental in the development (and ultimately the passage by Congress) of the Forestland Reserve Act in 1891, which reserved approximately 36 million acres for national forests—which became the initial lands of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). In 2003, U.S. Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS), as the chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, as well as my former boss, led the way in the U.S. Senate to pass the Healthy Forests Restoration Act after Congressman Greg Walden (R-OR) led the way for its passage in the U.S. House of Representatives. In 2017 and 2018, Congressman Bruce Westerman (R-AR)—the only forester in Congress—led the way to conceptualize and pass forest reform legislation in the House. In 2018, as one of his last actions before his retirement, Senator Cochran added the important bipartisan fire-funding fix and several forest reforms that Congressman Westerman developed for the 2018 Omnibus spending package, a bill authored by

Cochran in the Senate and signed into law by President Donald J. Trump. According to Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Purdue, “The fire funding fix, which has been sought for decades, is an important inclusion in the omnibus spending bill and I commend Congress for addressing the issue. Improving the way we fund wildfire suppression will help us better manage our forests. If we ensure that we have adequate resources for forest management, we can mitigate the frequency of wildfires and severity of future fire seasons.” The solution included in the omnibus provides a new funding structure from Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 through FY 2027. Beginning in FY 2020, $2.25 billion of new budget authority is available to the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior. The budget authority increases by $100 million each year, ending at $2.95 billion in new budget authority by FY 2027. For the duration of the eight-year fix, the fire suppression account will be funded at the level of the FY 2015 president’s budget request—$1.011 billion. If funding in the cap is used, the secretary of Agriculture must submit a report to Congress documenting aspects of fire season, such as decision-making and cost drivers, that led to the expenditures. The omnibus includes a two-year extension of Secure Rural Schools, providing rural counties approximately $200 million more per year.

“If we ensure that we have adequate resources for forest management, we can mitigate the frequency of wildfires and severity of future fire seasons.” - Sonny Purdue, Secretary of Agriculture

I spend a lot of time working on forest policy on behalf of Boone and Crockett. All of us working on forest policy understand that conservation can reverse these forest conditions outlined above through a variety of actions, such as harvesting trees and using controlled burns to mimic natural disturbances. These disturbances reduce buildups of forest litter (fuel) and overgrowth to encourage a variety of successional stages for wildlife, biodiversity, and the prevention of larger, hotter, more devastating fires from occurring that can destroy even old-growth forests. Preservation takes the opposite approach. It seeks to halt management actions and multiple use on the mistaken assumption the forests can and will return to their former “natural” condition. The conservation principles of sustainable use and active management has the greatest chance of producing the goods and services that people want, as well as retaining long-term ecological integrity. Conser vation provides the means and knowledge to produce timber from the most productive

The legislation also includes seven important forest management reforms, including: n

n n

Categorical exclusion for wildfire resilience projects Healthy Forest Restoration Act inclusion of fire and fuel breaks 20-year stewardship contracts Cottonwood reform Fire hazard mapping initiative Fuels management for protection of electric transmission lines

Good neighbor authority road rehabilitation inclusion Until the funding solution was achieved, the fire suppression portion of the USFS budget was funded at a rolling 10-year average of appropriations, while the agency’s overall budget remained relatively flat. Because fire seasons are longer and conditions are worse, the 10-year rolling fire suppression budget average kept rising, consuming a greater percentage of the entire forest service budget each year. This increase forced the agency to take funds from prevention programs to cover fire suppression costs. In addition, hunting, fishing, and other recreational programs—such as the funding of the Theodore Roosevelt Visitor’s Center—were cut to cover the costs of fire suppression. Last year, wildfire suppression costs exceeded $2.5 billion, making it the most expensive year on record. The USFS confronted wildfires last summer that started in the Southeast and continued through the year in the West. At peak season, more than 28,000 personnel were dispatched to fires, along with aircraft and other emergency response resources. n n

THE BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB TESTIFIES BEFORE CONGRESS In developing the forest reform legislation, James L. Cummins, co-chair of the Club’s Conservation Committee, testified before Congress on forest management and wildfire issues three times. During his last testimony, he stated, “Fifteen years ago I worked hard with the Congress regarding the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. Many of you spent a lot of time on it as well and many of us in the conservation community appreciate it.” He further said, “There is a need to address the issue holistically on federal, state, and private forests. Practically—wildfire and forest management knows no boundary line for fire, insects, disease, etc. Politically—as this committee works to craft forest legislation, try not to make it primarily a Northwest bill; include the Southeast which is primarily private lands and potential political allies. We need a bipartisan forest reform bill that can pass both chambers. “Professionally trained wildlife biologists and foresters know that forest diversity at the landscape level is the key to proper management achieving species diversity. There are four fundamental criteria each forest-dwelling wildlife species needs for survival: food, water, shelter, and space. Depending on how a forest is managed, various amounts of these criteria become available to the wildlife living there. Many wildlife managers and foresters consider active management the best solution to meet the habitat requirements of the largest variety of species. Active management reduces canopy closure and creates young forest habitat, which provides adequate food sources, nesting habitat and hiding places for forest wildlife. “From a hunter perspective, canopy closure creates reduced hunter success rates, which leads to fewer license sales, which equates to less money for state fish and wildlife agencies. This is especially true with mule deer and elk in the West and white-tailed deer in the East; these species depend on early forest successional stages for forbs, shrubs, and other food sources. The decline in conservation projects has resulted in a precipitous decline in species that are dependent on young forest habitat, such as wild turkeys. “The management of healthy forests [is] made economically feasible through the harvest and sale of forest products and timber. The activities also help offset the costs associated with other forest and wildlife management activities such as reforestation, invasive species control, prescribed fire and timber stand improvements. Without the funding that sustainable forest management provides the landowner (including the federal government), we are likely to see less forest management, which in turn, will exacerbate the problems of wildfire, decreased forest health, endangered species, and water quality. Without the revenue that sustainable forest management provides, we are also likely to see increased land conversion to non-forested uses and the loss of the basic operational capacity (i.e., loggers and mills) to accomplish on-the-ground, sustainable forest management that results in healthy, resilient forests important for a wide variety of ecological benefits, not to mention the economic benefits to rural America.” “When something has value, people will protect it. When forests have value as trees (economic, aesthetic, hunting, carbon credits, incentives for recovering threatened and endangered species, etc.), they will be protected, restored, and enhanced. When they don’t, there is a greater chance they will be turned into other uses, such as subdivisions, pasture, and row crop agriculture. So, recognize and embrace markets to increase the consumption of wood and wood products, require–or work with other committees to require–the use of wood in federal and state construction and work to increase the use of wood-based energy, etc.” Moreover, Club members Marc Brinkmeyer and George Emmerson made numerous trips to Washington to meet with senators and representatives to help push the final deal over the goal line. They also led a forestry roundtable discussion with Speaker Paul Ryan and other house members in Jackson Hole. Altogether they made countless calls and attended many meetings to secure bipartisan support for the helpful package, and their efforts are truly appreciated. The Boone and Crockett Club is appreciative of the opportunity to have been involved in federal forest management reform over the past 15 years. n

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 27

31 CURRENT MEMBERS OF THE WILDERNESS WARRIOR SOCIETY

The Wilderness Warrior Society is the Clubâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s premier major gifts society. It is named after Doug Brinkleyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s historic book about Theodore Roosevelt and his Crusade for America and was launched in 2011 to celebrate the 125th anniversary of the Boone and Crockett Club. With your gift of $125,000 or more, you will be honored by being named a member of the Wilderness Warrior Society. You will be presented with your own numbered limited edition bronze of Theodore Roosevelt on horseback, a custom Hickey Freeman Blazer, as well as other gifts to recognize and honor you for your contribution. The $125,000 donation can be paid with a $25,000 current contribution and the balance payable over a maximum of 4 years. Funds raised from Wilderness Warrior contributions are placed in the Boone and Crockett Club Foundation endowment where the principal remains intact, and the annual interest income generated provides permanent funding for vital conservation programs. There are now twenty-nine members of the Society. This translates to more than $3.6 million for the endowment and has been a major portion of the growth of these funds. It has been a huge success by any measure. Please join us in this grand effort. Contact the Boone and Crockett Club today to find out how you can become a member of the Wilderness Warrior Society. 2017 Annual Meeting, Savannah, Georgia

Trevor L. Ahlberg James F. Arnold Rene R. Barrientos Marc A. Brinkmeyer Marshall J. Collins Jr. William A. Demmer Gary W. Dietrich John P. Evans Steve J. Hageman George C. Hixon* B.B. Hollingsworth Jr. Ned S. Holmes N. Eric Johanson Tom L. Lewis Jimmy John Liautaud R. Terrell McCombs John L. Morris Michael J. Opitz Jack S. Parker* Paul V. Phillips Remo R. Pizzagalli Thomas D. Price Edward B. Rasmuson T. Garrick Steele Morrison Stevens Sr. Benjamin A. Strickling III Ben B. Wallace Mary L. Webster C. Martin Wood III Leonard H. Wurman M.D. Paul M. Zelisko * Deceased

Contact Terrell McCombs at 210/818-8363 for more details. Boone and Crockett Club www.boone-crockett.org 250 Station Drive, Missoula, MT 59801 406/542-1888

28 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

FAIR CH ASE | SP RI N G 2 0 17 28

B IRD GRI N

N L

E RG

George Bird Grinnell Society

BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB

SO C I E T Y

The Boone and Crockett Club George Bird Grinnell Society welcomes those individuals who wish to support our conservation programs through purely philanthropic, tax deductible gifts of $2,500 or more. Funds raised from the George Bird Grinnell Society are placed in the Boone and Crockett Club Foundation endowment where the principal remains intact. The annual interest income generated is then dedicated to vital conservation programs. Special recognition is given via Club publications and in the visitorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; gallery at Boone and Crockett Club Headquarters in Missoula, Montana, and with a custom plaque. After your initial gift of $2,500; gifts of $500 or more to the Boone and Crockett Club Foundation endowment will accumulate toward new contribution levels.

LEVELS OF GIVING: COPPER - $2,500 - $4,999 BRONZE - $5,000 - $9,999 SILVER - $10,000 - $24,999 GOLD - $25,000 - $49,999 DIAMOND - $50,000 - $124,999 Wilderness Warrior Society - $125,000 or more Grinnell Glacier, Glacier National Park

For more information contact Jodi Bishop at Boone and Crockett headquarters (406) 542-1888, Ext. 212 or jodi@boone-crockett.org FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8

Trailblazer Spotlight Trailblazers in Conservation represents a level of commitment from industry partners and others that support the mutual interests of science-informed wildlife management and conservation, and hunter ethics and advocacy.

For more than 100 years,

sportsmen around the world have protected their firearms with gun cases made from the heart of the Midwest. Boyt Harness Company has been the industry standard for over a century, and it all started with a small family-owned regional saddle harness shop in Iowa.

The Boyt Harness Company was founded in 1901, which at that time was known as Walter Boyt Saddlery. At first the Boyt brothers primarily manufactured fine driving harnesses for horse-drawn buggies. However, when World War I began, their manufacturing process changed and took the company in a direction that would frame it to where it is today. During World War I, the company found itself manufacturing many of the first firearm accessories, including military pistol holsters for the popular Colt 1911. Along with the firearm accessories, Boyt was also manufacturing cavalry saddle bags and harnesses for artillery and transport horses. Following the war, the company returned its manufacturing processes back to harnesses, saddles, bridles, collars and tack for farmers and ranchers across the Midwest, where their reputation for quality and delivery quickly became the

30 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

TrailblAzer CONSERVATION

PARTNER

TrailblAzer BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB

CONSERVATION

standard. But the start of World War II found Boyt manufacturing once again for the United States military. The company produced millions of pieces of equipment destined for both the European and the Pacific theatres. Equipment included knife sheaths, backpacks, web belts, cartridge pouches and M1 Garand slings. At the peak of war production, Boyt Harness employed 2,800 workers, making it one of the largest manufacturing operations in Iowa. After World War II, production shifted once again back to saddles and harnesses, but with thousands of GIs returning home to their favorite outdoors pursuits of hunting and shooting, the company quickly parlayed their military experience into the sporting market, where gun cases, hunting vests, and cartridge bags began to make up the majority of production. Thus the canvas case was created and was set as the premier method of firearm storage of the times, a position that Boyt has maintained for 70 years. Staying true to the company’s roots, today’s Signature Series canvas case features a harness leather handle, sling, and trim, and a tough shell made of 22-ounce canvas duck. The Signature Series case and many other canvas cases in Boyt’s canvas line also include Boyt Harness’s famous lifetime warranty. Boyt gun cases are made to last, and over the years we have seen many cases that have been passed down not only from father to son but from grandfather to grandson. Continuing with the company’s dominance in the hunting industry for firearm storage and transport, Boyt Harness Company rolled out a variety of H-Series Travel Cases in 2007. Our hard-sided travel cases are built using a custom formulated, injection molded resin that holds up to the toughest worldwide hunting and travel conditions. These cases are

PARTNER

constructed with the industry’s first all steel draw latches and a high density foam to protect and accommodate a variety of firearm shapes, styles, and sizes. Boyt H-Cases are also made in the U.S.A and are backed by the same famous lifetime warranty that stands up to our canvas cases. “As a company, we appreciate the fact that we would have never grown into what we are today if it were not for the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and the Boone and Crockett Club’s role in ensuring that our legacy as hunters and conservationists is preserved for future generations. Our employees are encouraged to become involved with hunter-conservation organizations, and we are proud of the fact that we contribute a great deal of our revenue back to those organizations,” said Tony Caligiuri, president of Boyt Harness Company, and who also serves as a member of the Boone and Crockett Club. Over the years, Boyt has introduced new product lines and acquired additional outdoor brands that now include Bob Allen, Mud River Sporting Dog Products, Rattlers Snake Proof, and The Outdoor Connection, makers of the Super Sling and Talon Swivels. This past year, the company announced an exciting partnership as the exclusive distributor of Kryptek hunting apparel, unique in the fact that Kryptek’s DNA is a modern-day version of Boyt. Kryptek founders Butch Whiting and Josh Cleghorn took what they learned on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan and forged a new approach to camouflage and outdoor apparel. Built with a tactical mindset, Kryptek’s offerings are a unique blend of combat proven designs with modern textile technologies built for hunting environments and weather conditions from the Brooks Range of Alaska to the Baja Desert of Mexico. n

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 31

ROBERT D. BROWN B&C PROFESSIONAL MEMBER HUNTER AND CONSERVATION ETHICS SUB-COMMITTEE

ON MY HONOR As many of my Boone and Crockett Club friends know, I’ve been associated with the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) for many years. Though I was only a Scout for a little over a year as a boy, I was a high-adventure assistant Scoutmaster and venturing crew leader for about 18 years as my three sons became Eagle Scouts. Since then, I’ve been a member of the Occoneechee Council in Raleigh, NC, and for the past five years an ATV safety instructor and summit trek leader at Camp Durant in Carthage, North Carolina.

What hunter would not want to abide by that oath? We wish to be honorable, to lead lives guided by whatever our religion might be, to obey the laws of our country, and to help other hunters, landowners, and youth whenever we can. To consider ourselves ethical hunters, we certainly want to keep ourselves physically capable of the hunt, abstain from alcohol or drugs when armed, and to follow moral guidelines, as provided by our Fair Chase statements. But what is the Scout law? It turns out that the Scouts’ law also gives us useful hunting guidance:

As our Ethics Committee discussed this important but sometimes elusive topic of hunting ethics, it occurred to me that just about all the guidance we need is encompassed by the more general guidance Boy Scouts are given. Their Scout oath states:

A Scout is Trustworthy, Loyal, Helpful, Friendly, Courteous, Kind, Obedient, Cheerful, Thrifty, Brave, Clean and Reverent.

On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country, And to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times;

To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.

32 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

If I had more space, I could go into what the Boy Scouts mean by each of those items, or I could tell you how I would interpret each as they apply to my hunting experiences and techniques. But I would rather you, the reader, do that. Please give it some thought. How would each term apply to how you hunt, what you consider ethical, and perhaps even to what you’ve seen other hunters do?

Not many people know that the Boy Scouts also have an outdoor code:

As an American I will do my best to: Be clean in my outdoor manners Be careful with fire Be considerate in the outdoors Be conservation minded This helps the Scouts—as well as hunters—to apply the general terms of the Scout law to our experiences in the outdoors, whether it be camping, backpacking, hunting or any other outdoor recreation. The program of Leave No Trace follows this outdoor code. Finally, the most obvious statement of Boy Scout guidance that just about everyone, including non-scouters know by heart is their motto: “Be Prepared.” We could pretty much sum up the entire hunting experience with that motto. Be prepared to know your game, its habits and habitat; be prepared to be legal in all that you do on your hunt; be prepared with the proper equipment for the game you are pursuing; be prepared physically and with the ability to use your gun, rifle, or bow capably and accurately; and be prepared to follow the Club’s Fair Chase guidelines and your own moral code when hunting. Do we need any more than that? n

Read more about B&C’s MOHAB (Montana High Adventure Base) program at our TRMR on page 34.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 33

MOHAB Montana Hig h Adventure Base at the

Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Ranch

“Our troop has sent three g roups to MOHAB over the last two years. The packrafting prog ram is one of a kind and the MOHAB staff incredibly knowledgeable. They have really have created a true ‘boys lead’ prog ram. The experience has made a huge positive impact on our Scouts and their leadership skills. I should also mention that the Bob Marshall is probably the most spectacular remote wilderness experience you can find in the lower 48. The whole experience is A+.” – Dan C., Adult Leader 34 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

LUKE COCCOLI B&C CONSERVATION PROGRAM MANAGER Photos Courtesy of MOHAB/BSA contributors

When I was filling out the application to

work for Boone and Crockett, still attending Montana State University at the time, I noticed that not only did the job title list “Facilities Manager” as the position for hire but was also followed by “/MOHAB Camp Director.” After further inquiring during my phone interview with several B&C staff, I learned just what exactly MOHAB stood for—Montana High Adventure Base. (The O is a hitchhiker included to avoid our camp sounding like an uncomfortable medical procedure but doubles to confuse some folks more familiar with Moab, Utah.)

The Montana High Adventure Base is the nation’s only nationally accredited high-adventure Boy Scouts of America (BSA) program that offers backcountry packrafting experiences. Regardless of the apparent acronym fetish, MOHAB is operated out of the Rasmuson Wildlife Conservation Center (RWCC) located on the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Ranch (TRMR) which sits just west of Dupuyer, Montana. (See, I wasn’t kidding about the acronym thing!) Packrafts, for those that are unfamiliar, do exactly as their name describes. They are highly packable, extremely lightweight, yet very durable, personal watercraft used to traverse up to class III whitewater rapids or the calmest of still water no matter where your travels may take you. Some models are being made to accommodate two passengers, and many hunters have begun taking packrafts on their outings when near water in order to more easily transport harvested game. Packrafting has not always been a primary program at MOHAB. In fact between 2005 when MOHAB offered its first trek into the “Bob” (Bob Marshall Wilderness complex) and 2013, trekking by foot was the only means of travel available for scouts. While the sightseeing, wildlife watching, fishing, witnessing spectacular vistas from various backcountry peaks and not to mention physically grueling and mentally refreshing trekking-only option were great, packrafting has catapulted MOHAB into the highest category of BSA high adventure programs. If you know anything about Boy Scouts, you know that patches are a big deal! So much so that at the BSA National Jamboree, there are certain areas set up for patch trading where scouts from all over the continent and even the globe will gather to exchange, trade and barter for the next best patch. Some collections of patches sell for hundreds, even thousands, of dollars and typically many individual troops or councils make a unique patch specifically to offer when attending “Jambo.” Just as some of our programs offered at MOHAB have changed and evolved throughout the years, so has our patch. The most current patch is awarded to the scout and scout leaders after they have completed their trek. It symbolizes a job well done; a complete and successful experience in which they had started preparing themselves for months, if not years, prior. After reading Dr. Brown’s “Ethics” column (pg. 32), I would like to take you through what our current patch represents and how it relates to the Boone and Crockett Club.

TOP: Adding packrafting has catapulted MOHAB into the highest category of BSA high adventure programs. ABOVE: MOHAB patches through the years. They are a big deal!

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 35

The current MOHAB patch.

“Seeing that I want to major in Fish and Wildlife Biology and Conservation, getting to experience the vast Bob Marshall Wilderness was the time of my life. I had so many amazing experiences in one of the most beautiful places I have ever been to and I will never forget.” – Corbin R., Scout

In the center of the logo is a jagged peak, similar to the one used for BSA Venture crews, representing the many mountains the scouts will see, climb, and in which they will be immersed for their seven-day program. Many jagged peaks can be seen right from base camp at the RWCC and TRMR. Venture crews can be co-ed, but they must be 14-20 years old in order to participate in any high adventure program—the same audience to which MOHAB caters. Encircling the jagged peaks is the rough outline of a compass. A compass can help guide scouts not only through the toughest parts of their MOHAB treks, but a moral compass keeps one on the right path throughout their entire life—a philosophy MOHAB hopes to inspire on day one. Directly below the compass is the most unique piece of the logo. Almost resembling a skull and crossbones, pirate-like appearance is a backpack and two sets of paddles crossed behind it. In the center of the backpack is

Day two of the MOHAB experience involves programs at base camp (RWCC) including trail meal packaging, group gear distribution, packraft training, expedition leadership and a shakedown hike.

36 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

a grizzly bear paw print—emblematic of the grizzly-inhabited country they have just spent six nights sleeping and living in while only having what they had meticulously packed and carried on their backs. Although packrafts are great when in water, they too need to be packed and carried when hiking from drainage to drainage. Bordering the upper portion of the compass are the words: Honor, Courage, Service, and Leadership. To many, these words can mean different things for any variety of reasons. At MOHAB, this is how they are defined:

HONOR

Honor your surroundings by appreciating all it has taken to conserve these wild lands and wild places. Honor those that have fought for so long to establish and protect usable wilderness areas. Respect the wildlife, the water and the rugged grandeur you find yourself in. Within the first day of camp all of the scouts and

adult leaders learn the meaning of conservation as well as the history and mission of the Boone and Crockett Club and its founders.

COURAGE

Be courageous while trying something you may have never done before. A multiday wilderness excursion with zero connectivity between you and the rest of society will be something many never get the chance to do. Absorb the solitude, and turn it into serenity. Attack every rapid with a can-do attitude! Some scouts attending MOHAB have never been in a wilderness or ever slept multiple nights outdoors.

SERVICE

Remember, you are not the only one who uses this land and these resources. Leave it better than how it was found. Serve others on the trail that may need your guidance or help, and they will return the favor when it is you that is in need.

“MOHAB was the pinnacle of my trekking experience, covering over 100+ miles on foot and river. The scenery in the Bob Marshall Wilderness was epic! Spending the 4th of July along the Chinese Wall is a memory that I will never forget. Definitely recommend the MOHAB trek to everyone who wants a g reat wilderness packrafting experience.” – Steve B., Adult Leader

When returning to the TRM Ranch, many troops voluntarily participate in conservation-related service projects such as pulling noxious weeds or removing unneeded, dilapidated fencing.

LEADERSHIP

Every day you have the opportunity to be a leader on your trek, although not always will you be the first one in line going down the trail or river. Lead by example. Always be sure you are right, and then go ahead. And even when you are back home and look at this trip only as a fond memory, continue to lead the path of conservation within your community.

Each scout has the opportunity to be the “leader of the day” as well as the “navigator for the day.” Each trek is scout-driven; meaning, every decision the party makes will be made by the scouts themselves and not the adults. From route itineraries to meal packaging and campsite selection, the scouts are in total control of their trek. I often tell guests at the TRMR and RWCC that MOHAB is the worst part of my job. And I mean it. MOHAB is the worst part of my job because I am the base camp director, meaning I have to stay at the RWCC and cannot attend weekly treks with the rest of the crew. Being the first

point of communication between backcountry travelers and the “if-needed” emergency rescue responders (plus various other duties) sometimes has its exciting moments but often I find myself looking over wilderness maps and itineraries dreaming of what could be around each river bend or contour line. One of the greatest parts of my job however is

being the one that gets to shake the hand of every scout that completes a trek, and present them with their very own MOHAB patch. Through their stories and photos, sunburned faces and callused hands, I can see and hear the newfound appreciation for our wild lands and wild places that has been instilled within them. And for being a part of that, I am honored. n

On the first night at MOHAB base camp the scouts are tasked with choosing their own 5-day route through the 1.5 million-acre Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex. An intimidating yet exciting and inspiring task!

“Getting to explore the Bob Marshall Wilderness with some of my closest friends was one of the best experiences of my scouting career. It was g reat learning to packraft and navigate throug h wilderness without trails. It was an opportunity to showcase my scouting skills while learning new ones in an environment that was rigorously challenging , but also fun.” – Spencer L., Scout

If you know of a scout or troop that is ready to earn their patch, call 406-472-3311 or visit www.montanahighadventurebase.com for more details. You can also follow MOHAB on Facebook and Instagram @BSAMOHAB

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 37

A N E XC E RP T FRO M NORTH A M E RI C A N W ILDLIFE P O LI CY A N D L AW | PA R T 2

Development of a policy to pr ot e c t w i ld l i fe b y developing refuges is an example of a long-term progression from a concept to a policy. As early as the 1800s explorers and writers with knowledge of the American West raised concerns about the wanton slaughter of wildlife for food, fashion, and commerce. The first federal act of Congress to protect wildlife and fish on public land was the establishment of Yosemite Valley Park and its transfer to the state of California in 1864. It was later returned to the federal government. In 1872 Yellowstone Park was established, primarily to protect the geysers and hot springs, but also to protect wildlife. This action was followed by a flurry of federal land acquisitions and policy enactments. Over time, the various wildlife refuge units were created, usually for scientifically recognized wildlife habitat needs, but also by private donations, or due to the personal preferences of legislators and other government officials or in response to crises (Fischman 2005). The largest current units are the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge at 7.8 million ha (19.3 million ac) and the Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge at 7.7 million ha (19.0 million ac), whereas the smallest is the 38 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Mille Lacs in Minnesota at 0.2 ha (0.5 ac) (Fischman 2005). The fi rst unit established to specifically and primarily conserve wildlife on federally owned lands was the Pribilof Islands in the Bering Sea near Alaska in 1868. Ulysses S. Grant approved congressional action to protect the northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) there, with the concept of obtaining revenue from management of this wildlife resource. President Benjamin Harrison established the first reserve for fish by executive order. His Forest Reserve Act of 1891 protected fish, wildlife, and forest resources at the Afognak Island Forest and Fish Culture Reserve in Alaska. More knowledge of the fish and wildlife resources of the nation was clearly needed, so in 1871 the Federal Office of the Commissioner of Fisheries was established, as was the Division of Economic Ornithology and Mammalogy in the Department of Agriculture in 1886. Thus far the trend had been to protect lands, fish, and wildlife primarily for their economic value, from which the government could derive income. But soon the public became more interested in protecting our wildlife resources, and a plethora of hunting, fishing, and conservation-minded nongovernmental groups (NGOs) were formed, such as the Boone and

National Wildlife Refuges THE NEED FOR WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND POLICY:

Robert D. Brown

Crockett Club and the Audubon Society. They lobbied for state laws to protect specific species and in some cases even hired game wardens (United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2006). When Theodore Roosevelt became president in 1901, those NGOs had a friend in the highest office of the land. Through use of executive orders, he established the first bona fide refuge for nonmarketable wildlife (the brown pelican [Pelecanus occidentalis]) at Pelican Island, Florida, in 1903. The Florida Audubon Society hired the warden Paul Kroegel on a salary of one dollar per month. To further protect colonial water birds from the feather, egg, and guano marketers, additional bird refuges were established at Breton, Louisiana (1904); Passage Key, Florida (1905); Shell Keys, Louisiana (1907); Key West, Florida (1908); Quillayute Needles, Washington (1907); Farallon Islands, California (1909); and parts of the Hawaiian Islands (1909). The first refuge on

Bureau of Reclamation lands was created in 1908 at Lower Klamath, California. Roosevelt established 17 such “overlay” refuges in one day in 1909 (United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2006). To manage these properties, the Bureau of Biological Survey replaced the Division of Economic Ornithology and Mammalogy in 1905. During Roosevelt’s term in office, 51 executive orders established wildlife reservations in 17 states and three territories. One challenge of establishing policies by executive order is that they can be changed by the next president, whereas those enacted by Congress and signed by the president cannot. Congress thus got into the act by establishing the Wichita Mountains Forest and Game Preserve in 1905, the National Bison Range in 1908, and the National Elk Refuge in 1912. The latter was the first to be known as a “refuge,” and the first tract of that land was purchased by the Izaak Walton League and donated to the gover nment. President

William Howard Taft added almost 1.1 million ha (2.7 million ac) of the Aleutian Islands chain to the system in 1913. The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 was fi rst enacted in 1916 to implement Canada’s Migratory Birds Convention, which provided the impetus to protect habitat along with the waterfowl. The Upper Mississippi River Wildlife and Fish Refuge was established in 1924 and the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge in 1928. However, efforts to fund these and other refuges through a one-dollar federal waterfowl-hunting stamp were rejected multiple times in Congress. It was not until 1934 that the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp Act of 1934, also known as the Duck Stamp Act, provided revenue for what was becoming a network of protected lands. The year 1934 was an auspicious year for conservation in that the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act authorized federal water resource agencies to acquire lands for mitigation and protection of fish and wildlife. In that year, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed a committee of J. N. “Ding” Darling,

Thomas Beck, and Aldo Leopold to advise him on waterfowl issues. Darling was soon appointed head of the Bureau of Biological Survey, and he hired J. Clark Salyer II to manage the refuge system. Salyer was to serve in that position for the next 31 years. Additional congressional actions and executive orders, including the Migratory and Mammal Treaty with Mexico of 1936, the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act of 1937, and the Lea Act of 1948 strengthened the refuge system. These Acts established refuges in the Carolina Sandhills in South Carolina, the Piedmont in Georgia, Noxubee in Mississippi, and Necedah in Wisconsin (United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2006). Eventually, in 1939, the Bureau of Biological Survey and the Commission of Fisheries were transferred from the Department of Agriculture to the Department of the Interior, then merged to form the United States Fish and Wildlife Service in 1940. That same year President Franklin Roosevelt decreed that the titles of the myriad units be changed from reservations, bird refuges, migratory waterfowl refuges, and wildlife refuges to the common

“national wildlife refuges” (Fischman 2005). During World War II the nation’s priorities shifted away from protecting wildlife and their habitats. But after the war, returning veterans and their families increased the pressure for more wildlife and scenic recreational opportunities. Authority to acquire additional refuge lands was approved by Congress in 1956 with the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956. Amendments made in 1958 to the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Act of 1934 and the Wetlands Loan Act of 1961 provided funding. The latter Act approved a $200 million loan to be spent over 23 years and to be repaid from duck stamp revenues. The Refuge Recreation Act of 1962 ensured that refuges could be used for hunting (now limited to 40% of the land area) and other recreational and educational uses, provided they did not interfere with the purposes for which the land was acquired. The Land and Water Conservation Fund, established in 1965, provided more funding for land acquisition. At long last, in 1966, members of Congress realized this hodge-podge collection of laws and executive orders

needed coordinated administration and management, and thus they enacted the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966. The Act provided guidelines for refuge purposes and again stipulated that all uses of refuge lands must be compatible with the original purpose for which the refuge was established. Science was to play a major role in land acquisition and management, as promoted in reports in 1963 and 1968 by Department of Interior committees led by A. Starker Leopold and the publication of Robert MacArthur and E. O. Wilson’s book, The Theory of Island Biogeography (1967). The book and the reports highlighted the need for a long-term goal of a “system” of protected habitats, large enough to be viable habitat for the long-term success of the species and preferably linked together with other protected areas (Fischman 2005). The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 redirected purposes on some existing refuges and provided for additional land acquisition for species threatened with extinction. Twenty-five additional refuges have been added under this Act, including

President Theodore Roosevelt established the first national wildlife refuge in 1903 at Pelican Island, Florida. Boone and Crockett Archives

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 39

the Attwater Prairie Chicken National Wildlife Refuge (for Tympanuchus cupido attwateri) in Texas, the Mississippi Sandhill Crane National Wildlife Refuge (for Grus canadensis pulla) in Mississippi, the Julia Butler Hansen Refuge for the Columbian WhiteTailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus leucurus) in Washington, the Crystal River National Wildlife Refuge in Florida for manatees (Tri-

Without a doubt, the largest addition to the refuge system came with the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 and the subsequent Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980. These Acts tripled the acreage in the system by expanding seven refuges and adding nine new ones, totaling 21.7 million ha (53.6 million ac) in additional land. This acquisition was and continues to be highly controversial, due to interest The refuge system is often in developing oil “under the radar” of the public and natural gas that are and Congress as compared with deposits believed to be unthe government’s larger, better- der the refuges. In the entire refknown land-holding programs. fact, uge system has been criticized for chechus manatus), and the its management. In a 1989 reHakalau Forest National Wild- port (United States Governlife Refuge in Hawaii for in- ment Accountability Office digenous birds. The system 1989), secondary uses harming now contains 180 animal and conservation goals were found 78 plant species listed under on 59% of the refuges. These included off-road-vehicle opthe ESA (Fischman 2005). As one might expect, erations, motor boating, minnot everyone wants a national ing, logging, grazing, and wildlife refuge (NWR), nation- military exercises. This led to al park, or other federally a lawsuit by the Wilderness managed property in their Society, the National Audubon backyard. One of the common Society, and the Defenders of complaints of counties was Wildlife (Fischman 2005). To that these holdings did not pay a degree, this criticism led to property taxes. Thus counties the next legislation. with a preponderance of pubPresident Bill Clinton lic lands had difficulty fund- signed the most recent modiing their fire and sheriff’s fication of the refuge system departments and their school in 1997 as the National Wildsystems. In 1976 Congress life Refuge System Improvepassed the Payment in Lieu of ment Act. This provided “orTaxes Act, which authorized ganic” legislation that a payment of 75 cents per acre protected previous executive of federal land to the county. orders, provided new adminThe subsequent amended istration and management Refuge Revenue Sharing Act guidance, and clarified the of 1978 allowed the payment threefold mission of the sysof 25% of the revenue generat- tem: to maintain the biologied from activities (such as cal integrity and a diversity of mining, timber harvesting, ecosystems, to provide for etc.) on NWRs to be paid to the environmental health, and to counties. The calculation of ensure appropriate wildthis percentage is complicat- life-related recreational uses ed, however, and does not of the refuges. In addition to depend on the revenue of the adding the preservation of local refuge. unique ecosystems as a 40 FA I R CH A S E | W I N T E R 2 0 1 8

purpose, the Act ensured that commercial development, unlike recreation, not only must be compatible with the unit’s purpose but also must make affi rmative contributions to the system’s mission. The Act mandated that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service acquire water rights for its refuges, an especially important point because many of the sites are in or are below watersheds. The Fish and Wildlife Service must also monitor the status and trends of the plants and animals under its care and apply adaptive management as needed (United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2009). This often calls for collaborative planning with each refuge’s neighbors, including those upstream of the refuge. Restoration is also required, as many of the non-Alaskan refuges had been degraded by farming before they entered the system (Fischman 2005). Over 47 million people visited our refuges in 2014 (United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2017). The system includes more than 545 units in all 50 states, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Johnson and Midway Atolls, and other Pacific islands, totaling almost 60.8 million ha (150.3 million ac) of habitat. They support 700 bird species, 220 mammal species, 250 reptile species, and an uncountable number of amphibian and fish species (United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2017). These lands and waters include 768,903 ha (1.9 million ac) of wetlands in the prairie pothole region of the United States for waterfowl production and 8.2 million ha (20.3 million ac) of Wilderness Areas (United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2006). But compared with the land holdings of the United States Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and the National Park Service, the

refuge system has the fewest visitors and receives the smallest federal appropriation per acre (Fischman 2005). The refuge system is oft en “under the radar” of the public and Congress as compared with the government’s larger, bett er-known land-holding programs. In addition, many NWR sites continue to be threatened by upstream pollution from farming or industry, nearby development, pressure for energy development, and, of course, climate change. Despite its challenges, the National Wildlife Refuge System has continued to grow for over 110 years, providing a large, yet imperfect network of fish and wildlife habitats across our nation. It has protected and managed habitats for plants, fish, and wildlife, provided access for hunters, fishers, and wildlife watchers, and preserved needed examples of our varied ecosystems. Through its development, it has provided a model for other countries to emulate. Literature Cited

Fischman, R. L. 2005. The significance of National Wildlife Refuges in the development of U.S. conservation policy. Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law 21(1):1–22. MacArthur, R. H., and E. O. Wilson. 1967. The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2009. National Wildlife Refuge System: missions and goals. https://www. fws.gov/refuges/policiesandbudget/ HR1420missionGoals.html. Accessed 20 April 2016. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2017. Conserving the Nature of America. http://www.fws.gov. Accessed 23 January 2016. United States Government Accountability Office. 1989. National wildlife refuges: continuing problems with incompatible uses call for bold action. GAO/RCED-89-196. United States General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C., USA. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2006. History of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wildlife Refuge System. Encyclopedia of Earth. http://editors.eol.org/ eoearth/wiki/History_of_the_U.S._ Fish_and_Wildlife_Service_ National_Wildlife_Refuge_System. Accessed 26 April 2016.

A basic understanding of wildlife law and policy is essential to becoming a complete sportsmen in today’s world!

North American Wildlife Policy and Law Bruce D. Leopold, Winifred B. Kessler, and James L. Cummins

North American Policy and Law begins by examining the need for, and history of, wildlife policy and law; wildlife and gun ownership; wildlife law enforcement; constitutional authorities and jurisdictions; how laws and policies are made; statutory law and agency rule-making; relationships of Indigenous peoples to natural resources; and subsistence resource use. Building on this foundation are detailed sections addressing: ■ ■

■

■ ■ ■

The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation Jurisdictions in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico with detailed coverage of key federal laws The roles of state and provincial agencies, Native American tribes, and conservation organizations International wildlife conservation Policy jobs in conservation Roles of politics, professionals, and the public

The book’s extensive coverage makes it an excellent reference for anyone interested in natural resource management, public policy, or environmental law.

Add this important book to your library. Order today!

www.bcstore.org Use discount code SUM18TR1887 to get your 20% discount

REGULAR PRICE Hardcover – $95 e-Book – $80

Also available as an e-Book!

ASSOCIATE PRICE Hardcover – $76 e-Book – $64

FAIR FAIR CH CHASE AS E || WI WIN NTTEERR 22001188 41 41 © istockphoto.com/ PatrickZiegler

Boone and Crockett Club

HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE 2018 HISTORY, GIFTS, BOOKS AND MORE

B&C MOOSE T-SHIRT

B&C BEAR T-SHIRT

B&C SHEEP T-SHIRT

ATSMM | $25 ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $20

ATLNB | $25 ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $20

ATSBS | $25 ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $20

– Maroon – Sizes M through 3XL

– Navy Blue – Sizes M through 3XL

– Black – Sizes M through 3XL

BOYT SUMMIT SLING - Genuine synthetic Nu-Buc facing on the pad - Integral thumb-loop for comfort and control - Non-Slip neoprene rubber underside - 2” wide shoulder pad - Heavy-Duty Tri-Glide adjustment - Superior materials and craftsmanship - TALON Quick-Release Steel 1” Swivels - B&C Logo laser etched on pad AFSS | $35 | ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $28

B&C BUCK KNIVES PAKLITE SKINNER

BOONE AND CROCKETT MONTANA LICENSE PLATES!

- 420HC stainless steel blade - Lightweight, sturdy and effective - B&C Logo engraved on blade

– Not a legal plate for moving vehicles, for display or decoration only.

HUNTER

LPHUNTER | $25 | ASSOCIATES $20

EST1887

LP1887 | $25 | ASSOCIATES $20

BOONER

LPBOONER | $25 | ASSOCIATES $20

181 8 42 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R2 020

AFSK | $30 | ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $24

B&C YETI RAMBLER - 20 oz, includes lid - Limited quantity, while supplies last YETIRAM | $39.99 | NO DISCOUNT AVAILABLE

front

HUNT FAIR CHASE CARIBOU HAT - SAND – Adjustable strap – Unstructured, six panel

HFCHCS | $25 | ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $20

HONORING THE HUNTED T-SHIRT – Heathered olive green – Sizes M through XL

HFCTSHG | $25 ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $20

back front

B&C ELK HAT - GREEN – Adjustable strap

AHGB | $25 | ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $20

HUNT FAIR CHASE CARIBOU HAT - BLACK – Adjustable strap – Casual, structured – Lightweight performance mesh

HFCHCB | $25 | ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $20

back

B&C 1887 HAT - GRAY – Adjustable strap

AHGW | $25 | ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $20

THE FUTURE OF WILDLIFE T-SHIRT – Dark gray, distressed design – Sizes M through XXL

HFCTSFB | $25 | ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $20

SHOP AT

Visit www.bcstore.org to see a complete list of the books, hats, shirts, and gifts available, or call 888/840-4868 to order over the phone.

WWW.BCSTORE.ORG

Use Code HOL18TR1887 to get your 20% discount | WI FAIR FAIRCH CH AS AS E E| WI NN TE TR E 2 0 1 8 43

GIVE THE GIFT OF FAIR CHASE!

We hope you have enjoyed your association with Boone and Crockett Club and have been able to see what B&C is doing to protect hunting, promote wildlife conservation, and educate the public. Sign up your hunting partners, friends, family, and anyone you think might benefit from joining the Boone and Crockett Club.

THE ASSOCIATE WELCOME PACKAGE INCLUDES: The first of four issues of Fair Chase magazine Login/Information card n Boone and Crockett window decal n Access to the on-line community: Searchable field photos from the B&C Records database. Individual scoring database where you can score your trophies on-line. Electronic archives of past Fair Chase feature articles. n A 20% discount on select Club publications and B&C branded merchandise on www.boone-crockett.org. n A customizable gift card from you! n n

UPGRADE TO A SPONSOR ASSOCIATE AND THEY WILL RECEIVE All of the benefits of a B&C Associate PLUS Significant tax deduction (FOR YOU!) n NEW! UNDER ARMOUR REVERSIBLE CAMO BEANIE n

HUNT FAIR CHASE KEY CHAIN AND BOTTLE OPENER - Polished silver with black and white enamel - Double sided - 1.7”x2.5” HFCK | $10 ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $8

DON’T FORGET THE STOCKING STUFFERS!

UPGRADE TO A SPORTSMAN ASSOCIATE AND THEY WILL RECEIVE All of the benefits of a B&C Associate PLUS Significant tax deduction (FOR YOU!) n Trophy Search ($50 value) n NEW! BUCK KNIVES 737 MULTI TOOL n n

You can indicate if you’d like the package to ship to you for personal delivery or directly to the recipient.

FAIR CHASE HUNTER DECAL - Decal measures 5-3/4 inches across FCHD | $10 | NO DISCOUNT AVAILABLE

B&C 1887 LAPEL PIN - Butterfly clasp ALP1887 | $12.50 | ASSOCIATES $10

B&C LIFETIME ASSOCIATE Lifetime Associates are an integral part of the Boone and Crockett Club’s efforts to make conservation of wildlife and their habitats a priority. By becoming a Lifetime Associate your commitment will be added to many others like you who consider themselves much more than just hunters, but hunter-conservationists. n n n n n n n n n

Subscription to Fair Chase magazine Lifetime shirt with B&C logo Lifetime hat with B&C logo Lifetime Associate plaque 20% discount on select B&C books and merchandise Significant tax deduction Invitations to special events One-year access to Trophy Search NEW! YETI RAMBLER 36 OZ. BOTTLE while supplies last

I R CH A S E | FA LL 2 0 1 8 44 FA 44 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E 2 0 18

THE COST IS A ONE-TIME FEE OF $1,500* OR FOUR QUARTERLY PAYMENTS OF $ 375 WITH $ 500 GOING DIRECTLY INTO THE CLUB’S ENDOWMENT. * If you are 65 and over and would like to become a Lifetime Associate you can now support the Boone and Crockett Club at the discounted rate of $1,250.

RECORDS OF NORTH AMERICAN BIG GAME, 14TH EDITION TWO-VOLUME PAPERBACK SET Long considered “The Book” of big game records, Boone and Crockett Club’s newest edition of its all-time records book is the most complete listing that catalogs the greatest big game ever taken in North America.

W H AT ’ S I N S I DE : n

Listings of more than 32,000 North American big game trophies in 38 categories including B&C final and gross scores, detailed measurements, plus location and year taken.

Four new World’s Records since the previous edition—Alaska-Yukon moose, pronghorn, Rocky Mountain goat, and bighorn sheep.

Stories, photos, and score charts for the World’s Records, plus over 300 images of the top-ranking big game animals.

Over 350 color field photos.

These one-of-a-kind records books live up to their long-standing reputation. In its fourteenth edition since the original book was published in 1932, this new edition has grown to over 900 pages split between two-volumes, not sold separately. NOTE: Only big game records that were accepted before December 31, 2015, are included in this book. Trophies accepted after that date will be included in our 30th Big Game Awards book, due out in fall 2019. - Two volumes, over 900 pages - Paperback binding - 8.5 x 11 inches

BRR14PB | $ 80 | ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $64

WILD GOURMET NATURALLY HEALTHY GAME, FISH AND FOWL RECIPES FOR EVERYDAY CHEFS America’s most respected chefs share their favorite recipes covering a menagerie of wild meats and a world of flavors. This scrumptiously illustrated cookbook features over 60 easy, step-by-step recipes that will please the most discriminating eaters. Recipes are presented with accompanying photographs, as well as wine pairings suggested by third generation Napa wine maker Marc Mondavi. Wild Gourmet is much more than just a cookbook—improve the flavor of your game with real-world processing tips. Learn to butcher your own harvest with step-by-step, illustrated instructions covering: rabbit, duck, squirrel, turkey, elk, and salmon. Wild Gourmet makes it easy for anyone to tame wild meat in the kitchen! HARDCOVE R EDITION - Over 300 color photographs - 8 x 10 inches, 272 pages BPWG | $34.95 | ASSOCIATES PAY ONLY $27.95

BUT WAIT.... THERE’S MORE!

BONUS! Each cookbook includes a venison meat chart poster!

You will find a complete list of B&C books on our web site including several high-end limited editions that make excellent gifts. Our web store also provides more detailed information about each book. If you prefer e-books, most of our paperback books are available from your favorite e-book retailer.

Gold Award Cooking

Silver Award Cookbooks

IBPA Benjamin Franklin Award

Foreword Reviews Indie FabAwards

SHOP AT

WWW.BCSTORE.ORG

Use Code HOL18TR1887 to get your 20% discount FAIR CH AS E | FAL L 2 0 1 8 FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E 2 0 1 8 45 45

ASSESSING THE SCIENCE BEHIND OPPOSITION TO MOUNTAIN LION HUNTING In 2017, the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) released a report titled “State of the Mountain Lion—A Call to End Trophy Hunting of America’s Lion.” In the report, HSUS calls for an end to mountain lion hunting in the United States based on several scientific arguments. These arguments range from citing available literature on demography, ecology, and sociality of mountain lions, to the protection of potential habitat and population sizes across 16 states where breeding populations exist. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Program, was asked to review the science presented in the report (both linked at the bottom of this article), focusing on subjects key to conclusions of the report. Specifically, the USGS was asked to provide a full and unbiased assessment of the recommendations presented in the document.

The HSUS listed six recommendations (with some excerpts below from the text for each one): n

Protection from direct human intervention Protection from trophy hunting, trapping and other unnecessary killing must be a top priority for improving policies at the state level.

State wildlife agency reform Funding for state agencies and composition of boards and commissions comes from hunting interests, and those interests do not have the support of the majority of the public.

Protected species designation Protected species status should be established or maintained in those states where mountain lions currently do not exist to support reduced persecution and promote future expansion into their historic range.

Improved habitat protection and safe passages Ensuring mountain lions have access to large, contiguous habitat without the threat of human persecution or development should be a priority for state lawmakers and the general public.

Humane mountain lion response Potential conflicts can be easily prevented or reduced. Moreover, agencies can adopt humane policies to improve how conflicts are

46 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

SCIENCE BLASTS

managed, saving the lives of mountain lions who pose little or no threat to humans, pets and livestock. n

Improved public perception and management Public support for mountain lion conservation is essential for the species’ long-term persistence in the U.S. Support for wildlife conservation at the state and federal level requires strong public backing to achieve beneficial legislative and regulatory action.

The HSUS report contains an appendix that identifies potential mountain lion habitat in 15 states, using geographic information system technology to estimate lion habitat through interpretation of coarse map layers of estimates of available prey, terrain ruggedness and human footprint. As the title of the HSUS report implies, it calls for an end to mountain lion hunting based on the report’s findings. The USGS limited its review to assessing the science put forth in the report. The findings of USGS include: “Positions stated in the Humane Society of the United States (2017) are based on human values; in this case, an opposition to “trophy hunting” in general and specifically the harvest of mountain lions. Although inherently subjective, these values are as legitimate as those of any other stakeholder in the effective conservation of wildlife in the United States. The report cites numerous polls to illustrate that these values are shared

JOHN F. ORGAN B&C PROFESSIONAL MEMBER Director of the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units

by a diversity of people. Indeed, these values may be increasingly prevalent in the United States as constituencies that have traditionally taken part in hunting and fishing decline (Manfredo and others, 2003; but see Butler and others, 2003 for an alternative finding). “All decisions in wildlife management are based on human values, including the value placed on science. Care must be taken, however, when scientific arguments are used to support recommendations based on other values. Science is easily misused on behalf of non-scientific agendas, becoming a seemingly objective but diversionary proxy for the subjective values behind the agendas (Mitchell and others, 2018). The HSUS report falls short on four standards that would lend it scientific credibility: (1) an assumption that hunting limits mountain lion populations, (2) pertinent scientific literature either was ignored or selectively cited and interpreted, (3) imprecise and inadequate demographic measures were used to illustrate the detrimental effects of hunting, and (4) a scientifically inadequate estimate of potential lion densities was used to argue that hunting keeps densities of mountain lions below acceptable limits.” The USGS review found the HSUS based its report on the inherent presumption that hunting limits mountain

lion populations and then attempted to build a scientific case to support this belief. As the review states, “seeking evidence to argue a preconceived conclusion is inherently unscientific.” The review goes on to state: “The report cites but then ignores factors other than hunting that could influence lion populations across their range (that is, habitat loss and fragmentation, poaching, disease, starvation, inbreeding, intraspecific strife, poisoning and climate change; Humane Society of the United States, 2017, p. 36–37). The scientific remedy for confirmation bias is to evaluate the evidence for alternative explanatory causes for observed phenomena (Sells and others, 2018). Without an objective evaluation of all factors potentially influencing mountain lion populations, it cannot be concluded that hunting is the dominant limiting factor, as the report claims. The evidence needed to objectively evaluate factors influencing demography of mountain lions is rare and sparse across the full range of mountain lion populations in the United States. An analysis of all available information almost certainly would have shown much more ambiguous and uncertain patterns than the report currently presents.” The review noted that the HSUS report selectively cited and interpreted literature. “The report cites numerous peer-rev iewe d

publications to support its recommendation against hunting of mountain lions. In building this case, the report frequently fails to reference relevant publications offering contrary conclusions, or offers selective interpretations, thereby failing to thoroughly assess all pertinent results, assumptions, and critical caveats detailed in the original peer-reviewed papers. Selective use of peer-reviewed scientific literature is misinformative, particularly for readers unfamiliar with published research, which diminishes the credibility of the report.” The review found that the HSUS report used imprecise and inadequate demographic measures in concluding that “trophy hunting mortality” is the main cause of a decline in mountain lion abundance. Identifying and measuring demographic parameters for large carnivores such as the mountain lion is extremely difficult, because they occur at low densities, range widely, and are highly elusive. HSUS used imprecise concepts and definitions along with misleading figures and discussion of mountain lion mortality, and then drew inappropriate conclusions. The HSUS report provided estimates of potential mountain lion densities to build further support for the position that mountain lions are overharvested. The review found a host of problems with the science behind their

approach, for example: “Overall, the data and modeling approach used to estimate potential mountain lion density in the report are problematic. There are critical issues with the nature of prey data selected, the use of relatively small female home range sizes for delineating habitat classifications, vague classifications of habitat quality, use of a fixed lion density estimate across the western United States, questionable assumptions in the modeling process, and the use of the derived abundance estimates without an assessment (either formal or informal) of associated uncertainty.” The USGS review ends with the following section titled “Management Implications”:“Humane Society of the United States (2017) argues against hunting of mountain lions based on human values, while attempting to demonstrate scientific support for those values. The science used to support the foregone conclusion that mountain lions generally are over-hunted is of insufficient logical and methodological rigor to be credible. Importantly, the unsubstantiated contentions distract from two important points made in the report that are difficult for anybody to argue: (1) parts of American society are decreasingly tolerant of hunting mountain lions and (2) harvest decisions made by state agencies would benefit from more rigorous measures of population estimation. Few managers

All decisions in wildlife management are based on human values, including the value placed on science. Care must be taken, however, when scientific arguments are used to support recommendations based on other values. Science is easily misused on behalf of nonscientific agendas, becoming a seemingly objective but diversionary proxy for the subjective values behind the agendas.

would disagree with either of those points. The question then becomes, what are the realistic approaches management agencies can take to address them? Failing to adapt to societal changes can lead to loss of management authority by state agencies (for example, ballot initiatives that led to the ban on mountain lion hunting in California; Bleich and Pierce, 2005), but the reasonable means of adaptation may be unclear. Management of mountain lion hunting would be more transparent and quantitatively defensible if it were based on rigorous population estimates, but reasonable means of support and methodological approaches for doing such monitoring are yet to be discovered or widely adopted. Quasi-scientific arguments based on preordained, value-based conclusions are not likely to provide clarity to either of these issues.” Peer review is integral to the scientific process. When data and recommendations are put forward, it is important to know that they have undergone such scrutiny and can be considered reliable. In the absence of such information coming forth in a true peer-reviewed outlet, the findings should be interpreted with caution, regardless how professional the appearance is. When in doubt, ask the experts! n

The HSUS report can be found at: https://blog. humanesociety.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/04/ Final_Mountain-Lions_DIGITAL_final.pdf The USGS review, which went through internal agency peer review itself, can be found at: https://doi.org/10.3133/ ofr20181128

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 47

EDUCATING THE

NEXT GENERATION OF

B&C UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS

CONSERVATION LEADERS The Boone and Crockett Club University Program is designed to provide science-based knowledge from seasoned wildlife professionals and educators to college graduates in the wildlife field to better prepare the graduates for the responsible and wise management of wildlife in the future.

The Wildlife Society and Boone and Crockett Club’s University Programs

PROMOTING PROFESSIONAL ENGAGEMENT The Boone and Crockett Club’s presence at this year’s Wildlife Society Conference in Cleveland was prominent. The B&C’s University Programs organized a symposium that presented case studies and lessons from prominent wildlife professionals on the delicate balance between stakeholder engagement and scientific decision making when formulating wildlife policy. The wildlife profession is solidly founded in the disciplines of biological, quantitative, and social sciences, yet wildlife professionals also must function within the reality of political and public arenas. Thus, in their efforts to manage and conserve wild-life populations and habitats, wildlife biologists often en-counter politically and publicly challenging situations. The Boone and Crockett Club hosted two luncheons during the conference. As one of the Leading Sponsors of The Wildlife Society, Boone and Crockett had the opportunity to reach out to over 100 up and coming wildlife biologists at the Student Chapter Leaders Luncheon. B&C Professor Josh Millspaugh gave those in attendance a brief history lesson about B&C and our long history with science-based 48 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

wildlife management. He also introduced our Hunting for Sustainability program for college students who are interested in hunting but haven’t had the opportunity to learn. The 3-day program explores hunter ethics, motivations, fears, the role of hunting in wildlife management, the history of conservation, hunting regulations, firearm safety, and field dressing, processing, storing, and cooking harvested wild-life. A substantial portion of the program is devoted to food. Participants eat wild game all weekend prepared by a professional chef who discusses tips for preparing and cooking game. As a take-away from the luncheon, each student received a customized noodle bowl complete with a venison ramen recipe crafted by B&C’s Director of Big Game Records Justin Spring and fortune cookies with hunting and wildlife inspired quotes. The B&C Fellows luncheon was created to bring together Boone and Crockett Fellows, Boone and Crockett Professional Members and speakers from the Wildlife Policy symposium for lunch and informal discussion. B&C Professional Member, Dr. John Organ of the United States Geological Survey, was the speaker and shared some

professional lessons that have made a difference in his career. Boone and Crockett Club's new text book, North American Wildlife Policy and Law, was on display during the conference along with a special book signing with all three editors and several of the contributing authors. This comprehensive text thoroughly examines the history and foundation of policy, reviews and analyzes major federal, state, and provincial laws and policies important to natural resource management, and most uniquely discusses application and practice of policy to ensure sustainability of wildlife, fish and their habitats. Read an excerpt from the book on page 38. n

CHALLENGES OF BALANCING STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND SCIENTIFIC DECISION-MAKING TO INFORM WILDLIFE POLICY Coyote Wars Move East: Stakeholder Reaction to Fawn Predation Research Learning from History to Bring Evidence into Canid Management – the Case of the Australian Dingo Bacteria and Viruses and Prions, Oh My: Dealing with Stakeholders on Wildlife Disease Issues Elk management in the political landscape of northwestern Minnesota The Management of Humans with Interests in Invasive Wild Pigs An evaluation of State Incentive Programs for Habitat Management on Private Land Wild Horse and Burro Management: Using Science and Coalitions to Advance Sound Policy Strategic Bird Conservation through Stakeholder Participation in Ecosystem Service Payments and Carbon Offsets: A Case Study from Costa Rica Building Trust Among Conservation Stakeholders Around Shared Values Balancing Science and Stakeholder Interests in the Conservation of Lesser Prairie-Chickens

Professional Member John Organ introduced Professional Member, Wini Kessler, who gave the Aldo Leopold Keynote Address: The Gifts of the Dying Wolf and other “Aha” Moments.

North American Wildlife Policy and Law editors and authors gathered for a book signing event during the conference. TOP ROW, LEFT TO RIGHT: Koichi Kaji, Chase Voirin, James R. Heffelfinger, Thomas M. Franklin, William F. Porter, Perry S. Barboza. BOTTOM ROW, LEFT TO RIGHT: Bruce D. Leopold (Editor), Winifred B. Kessler (Editor), James L. Cummins (Editor), Serra J. Hoagland, and John F. Organ.

BELOW: Professors and Fellows were able to network and share stories with B&C Members at the University Programs Fellows luncheon. John Organ presented at the luncheon sharing the professional lessons he has learned throughout his career.

LEFT: Two B&C Fellows from Michigan State University, Rebecca Cain and Garrett Knowlton, presented posters at TWS. RIGHT: University of Montana professor Joshua Millspaugh addresses students at the TWS Student Chapter Leaders Lunch, which the Club sponsored. This was an opportunity to introduce young wildlife professionals to the history and importance of the Boone and Crockett Club.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 49

Â©DENVER BRYAN/IMAGES ON THE WILDSIDE

50 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

A message brought to you by

“HE IS EASILY THE MOST SECRETIVE, MISUNDERSTOOD AND MYSTIFYING BIG GAME ANIMAL ON OUR CONTINENT. He is a fluid killer – an engineering feat of layered muscle with massive forearms, leaf- spring hind quarters and bone crushing jaws. He’s been among us, at the edges of our fires, hunting along side of us, for thousands of years.”

– BOONE AND CROCKETT TELEVISION SERIES, BIG GAME PROFILES PRESENTED BY LEUPOLD 2006

PG. 48 ASSESSING THE SCIENCE BEHIND OPPOSITION TO MOUNTAIN LION HUNTING BY JOHN F. ORGAN

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 51

BEARS EDGE ON AN

Imagine a 300-pound

Open Water

Rock/Sand/Clay

Shrub

Agriculture

Developed

Forest

Grassland

Wetland

52 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

male bear at the edge of a hardwood forest that borders a crop field bursting with ripe corn. Does he take a detour to avoid venturing into this exposed area, or does he walk in and enjoy the abundance of food? Would it matter if this was the only crop field in the area or adjacent to five other fields? Or if there were many bears in the area? Or if there were people nearby? What if this bear was a sow with two cubs in tow?

JENNIFER SMITH AND DAVID WILLIAMS BOONE AND CROCKETT QUANTITATIVE WILDLIFE CENTER MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Photos Courtesy of Author

By recognizing that animals, like humans, can make decisions dependent upon the context in which they are happening, we can account for the true complexity in patterns of resource use and bolster management efforts to effectively balance the needs of humans and wildlife.

Like bears and other wildlife, humans make hundreds of decisions every day. Some of these decisions are small and relatively inconsequential—what to eat for breakfast, for example, while others are bigger with larger implications and consequences—like whether to accept a new job offer. Regardless of the magnitude of the decision, our choice is usually dependent on the context of our life at that point in time and space. Perhaps the weather influenced our decision to eat a cold or hot breakfast, while factors such as relationships, financial stability, and location might influence our decision to accept or reject a job offer. The concept that human decisions are context-dependent may not be surprising or new, but wildlife biologists have recently

questioned if animals are also capable of such behavior. Historically, lack of data and analytical capacity prevented us from describing and quantifying these contextual influences on the behavioral decisions of wildlife. Consequently, our ability to predict how wildlife respond to new landscapes and circumstances was limited. At the Boone and Crockett Quantitative Wildlife Center at Michigan State University, we target conservation questions that are well-suited to advanced quantitative methods and to provide answers for existing management issues. Recently, our research coupled practical needs about shifting distributions of bear populations with innovative analytical approaches and demonstrated that it’s not just

humans whose decisions are context-dependent. The choices black bears make about using resources (food, shelter, water, etc.) are also dependent on the context in which they occur—a reality which will become increasingly relevant as the physical landscapes, distributions of human and wildlife populations, and environmental conditions defining the context continue to change. CHANGING EXPECTATIONS

The Lower Peninsula of Michigan is perhaps best known for miles of Great Lakes shorelines and its iconic mitten-shape. A lesser known, but consequential, characteristic is the sharp latitudinal division of land cover; the northern half of the Lower Peninsula is dominated by forests,

while the southern half is almost entirely urban and agricultural land. Historically, black bears in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan have lived in the northern half, where the forests provide abundant cover and food. So, you can imagine the surprise wildlife managers and residents felt when bears started showing up in neighborhoods hundreds of miles south of their typical northern range. Since 2005, black bears have been spotted in the southern Lower Peninsula, and the sightings have raised pressing questions for wildlife biologists. Will black bears adapt to the southern Peninsula with its vastly different habitat and bear and human populations? How will bears impact agricultural lands in a region with a strong agricultural economy? FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 53

GETTING OUR BEARINGS

Reports of black bears raiding crops and traveling through agricultural fields are found across the country. While not necessarily common, such behavior is concerning because these incidents can be dangerous and damaging for humans and their livelihoods. Generally, we expect black bears to avoid agricultural fields; such areas are woefully lacking in trees, which bears climb when threatened. On the other hand, during summer and fall many agricultural fields are full of ripening crops, and black bears feed ravenously at these times of year in preparation for the upcoming winter. To untangle this apparent paradox and to better understand how bears perceive this risk-reward situation, we need to take a closer look at how bears respond

to and utilize the environment around them. Understanding which resources animals need for survival is a fundamental part of managing wildlife. Biologists who search for patterns in how, when, and why animals use different aspects of their habitat are studying their resource selection behavior. Fundamentally, resource selection studies try to answer a simple question: which resources do animals use and which do they avoid? When we understand these patterns, we can prioritize conservation of critical resources in the range of a species, identify resources important to multiple species, and anticipate conflicts between humans and wildlife who are invested in the same resource. Typically, findings from resource selection

An example of GPS locations of a collared bear in the study.

54 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

studies reveal how a species responds (through use or avoidance) to a resource on average and the strength of this average response. However, when the landscapes animals occupy include fragmented habitats, multiple land uses, and uneven distribution of humans and wildlife, patterns of resource use become more complicated. Animals may respond differently to the same resource within these complex landscapes; in these cases, the average response doesn’t adequately describe behavior towards a resource. Instead, we need to understand how the context around an animal in a complex landscape influences its response to a resource. HIGH-RISK, HIGH-REWARD

The evolving bear management situation in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan heightened the need to dig deeper into the question of how black bears respond to agricultural lands. Most existing resource selection studies of black bears and agriculture confirmed a general expectation: statistically speaking, black bears avoid agricultural land. Yet, we know that sometimes bears decide that exploiting an agricultural field is worth it. After all, these fields are a tempting high-risk, high-reward opportunity for bears, and the animal must be willing to trade higher safety for increased calories. Because of this inherent tradeoff, we suspected the choice a bear makes could be significantly nudged one way or the other by the specific context of the decision. The question was, under what conditions did black bears choose to exploit an agricultural field, and are those conditions predictable? In response to sightings of black bears in the southern Lower Peninsula of Michigan, biologists at the Michigan

Department of Natural Resources and researchers from the Boone and Crockett Quantitative Wildlife Center trapped 15 bears on the southern edge of their typical northern range and outfitted them with GPS collars. Each bear’s collar collected the location of the bear every 30-45 minutes. Some collars fell off, and some collared bears were harvested, but typically each collar collected four to seven months of data during the non-hibernation period. We used the GPS data to compare characteristics of the environment around locations a bear used with those of locations they could have used but didn’t. Initially, these data look like a meaningless shotgun blast of points scattered across a satellite image. But when funneled into ecological models, we can use these data to create a resource selection analysis and evaluate if black bears respond differently to agricultural lands depending on the context of the encounter. WHAT MATTERS TO A BEAR?

If a black bear decimates a field of corn, it’s understandable for the surrounding community, and especially farmers, to become concerned. But our research suggests all agricultural fields are not equally tempting to a bear. Instead, certain characteristics nudge the risk-reward balance of a bear using a field one way or the other. We discovered that the sex of a bear, the proximity of a field to human developments, and the number of other black bears (population density) and amount of agricultural land in the surrounding area all influenced the decision a bear made to either avoid or use a patch of agriculture. The density of the local bear population influenced how likely either male or female bears were to use an

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 55

agricultural field, but the two sexes responded to this part of the context differently. In fact, their responses were complete opposites. Male bears decided in favor of using the field only when there were very few bears in the local population; females were more likely to go into a field if there were many bears nearby. Two realities of everyday life for black bears help explain this pattern. First, animals compete with one another for resources. When animal populations are dense, there is often more competition to gain the food, water, and shelter an individual requires or prefers. Second, in the spring and summer, many female bears have cubs (which was true for all females in our study) and it’s well known that females with cubs behave more cautiously than solo males. After all, females have invested an enormous amount of energy into these cubs who are dependent on her for protection, while males have only themselves to defend. Consequently, a male bear is overall more likely to risk entering an agricultural field. When a male who is part of a relatively small population approaches a patch of agricultural land,

56 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

the risk may be especially low to venture into the field because the chances of meeting a larger, more dominant male are low. Comparatively, a mother bear who is part of a small population faces less competition, and therefore has more freedom to choose which resources to use. From her perspective, agricultural fields are risky for her and her cubs, so her first choice may be to avoid them. However, a mother bear in a dense population with higher competition for food may be forced to use a resource she considers less desirable—in this case, an exposed field associated with humans. Although males and females responded differently to the context of population density, they seemed to agree an agricultural field situated near a lot of human activity was too risky to enter. Both males and females avoided fields that were close to human developments, but they were willing to use one that was at least a few kilometers away from the nearest road or building. Bears were also more likely to use a field if it was relatively small and isolated, rather than connected to other agricultural fields. This suggests that, from the

perspective of a black bear, increased human presence added additional risk to entering agricultural lands. After all, a human is less likely to spot a bear in a field that is situated far away from buildings and roads, and a bear can retreat from a small patch of agriculture more easily than from a huge field. Black bears are skittish by nature, and they are a popular game species in Michigan, so while it’s not surprising that a harvested species would perceive human activity as threatening, we also know black bears can become thoroughly acclimated to living and foraging in human-dominated landscapes. For the moment, stronger human presence swings the risk-reward balance towards avoiding agricultural fields for bears in the Lower Peninsula, but their skill at adapting to the context around them cautions us that this may not be the end of the story.

and complicated by rapid changes in land use and distributions of human and wildlife populations. Applying advanced analytical tools can help us make sense of the variation in how wildlife respond to these changing landscapes. In Michigan, we discovered we can anticipate where conditions favor use of agricultural areas by bears; small fields that are over a kilometer away from the nearest human development are most likely to tempt a bear, and areas with low bear densities will be especially appealing to males while high density areas could push females with cubs into fields. By recognizing that animals, like humans, can make decisions dependent upon the context in which they are happening, we can account for the true complexity in patterns of resource use and bolster management efforts to effectively balance the needs of humans and wildlife. n

LESSONS LEARNED

There is no evidence that black bears in the southern Lower Peninsula of Michigan are establishing a permanent, breeding, population. But sightings of lone individuals have persisted. Today, wildlife conservation is challenged

LEFT: Boone and Crockett Fellow Jennifer Smith keeps black bear cubs warm during a den visit to download data stored on-board the mother’s GPS collar. RIGHT: Jennifer is with a sedated adult male bear ready to be fitted with a GPS collar.

1 HUNTING APP

The Boone and Crockett Layer provides detailed information regarding trophy-class species for every state in the country. View the color-coded heat map of the U.S. broken out by counties. This layer has been built in collaboration with the B&C Club, and a portion of all sales go to support their mission. Take advantage and increase your odds with the onX B&C Trophy Big Game Records Layer for only $999 per year. Get the onX Boone and Crockett Layer Today!

For more information about the onX Hunt App go to onXmaps.com/hunt

FAIR FAIR CHASE CH AS E | | SUM WI NM T E R 2 0 1 8 57

KEITH BALFOURD B&C PROFESSIONAL MEMBER

EVOLUTION OF THE VFIELD PHOTO V PART 1

A trophy is defined as a prize or memento. If that’s true, then photographs from the hunt are as much a trophy as the subjects in our photographs. This includes what we as hunters commonly refer to as the “field photo.” They are a part of history—our own history and the history of hunting in North America (and elsewhere). We thought it would be fun to take a look at how the field photo has captured this history and evolved over time.

Long before the camera was widely available in a size that could easily be carried into the field and was affordable to the majority of sportsmen, field photos were anything but. If they could and were ambitious enough, early sportsmen would bring their prize to a studio to get photographed. Some would go to great lengths to make these photos appear to be taken on location. Nevertheless, many of these early hunting photographs appeared staged, because, well, they were. Often, others who were not on the hunt—like family members—would sit it for the shot.

58 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Eventually, as the camera did make it into the field, the staged studio shots gave way to the genuine field photo. The object was always to celebrate a successful hunt and capture the moment and the animals taken. In huntingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s early days, game was abundant and viewed as being in unlimited supply. Many field photos of the day were taken to advertise the prowess of the huntsmen by showing camps and meat poles bending with the quantity of the take.

In the early days of the field photo, it was rare for the hunter to be empty-handed. Our firearms were just as much part of the story and the animals taken. A trusty rifle always seemed to make it into the photo. It, too, was part of the story, so much so that if the photo was taken back at camp, at home, or at some later date, it was the custom to still work the hunting rifle into the shot. This tradition exists to this day.

There was a time when it was automatic to rest oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s rifle across the antler spread of the game taken, whether or not the hunter was in the photo. One could only assume this was more to boast the size of the trophy than an afterthought as to where to place the gun and get it in the photo. Our firearms are a part of hunting history then and today.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 59

How we got into the backcountry, got around while in it, and made it back home or to camp again has always been a big part of the hunting story. Horses, mules, wagons and trains were common appearances in our hunting photography that has become part of our recorded hunting history.

As time marched on and our machines became a part of the hunt, they made it into the field photo. Trucks, cars, campers and even aircraft also told part of the story.

WANT TO SEE MORE FIELD PHOTOS FROM THE PAST? VINTAGE HUNTING ALBUM

A Photographic Collection of Days Gone By n

Printed hardcover n 200 pages n 10 x 8 inches BPVFP | $29.95

ASSOCIATES | $23.95

60 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

RIPCORD RESCUE TRAVEL INSURANCE IS THE ONE-STOP INTEGRATED TRAVEL PROTECTION PROGRAM FOR HUNTERS.

EXPERIENCED HUNTERS CHOOSE RIPCORD

“Ripcord is the real deal and is a must on every hunt. I put my trust in their team of special operations veterans and medical professionals when I’m hunting, and so should you.”

“I made the switch to Ripcord because they truly do what they say. You need a rescue provider you can rely on, and their travel insurance is the best a hunter can get.”

“We called Ripcord and in a matter of hours we were out of the bush and I was sitting in the hospital in Anchorage getting every test done imaginable. Thank God for Ripcord.”

- JIM SHOCKEY

- LARRY WEISHUHN

- MARK PETERSON

RIPCORD IS THE OFFICIAL RESCUE TRAVEL INSURANCE PROVIDER FOR THE BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB “Ripcord has become the go-to adventure travel insurance provider and has saved many hunters’ lives. We fully recommend the company to all of our members.” - Keith Balfourd Boone and Crockett Club Ripcord Rescue Travel Insurance™ is powered by Redpoint Resolutions, owned and operated by physicians and special operations veterans.

RIPCORD RESCUE TRAVEL INSURANCE | +1 (415) 481-0600 WWW.RIPCORDRESCUETRAVELINSURANCE.COM/BOONECROCKETT FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 61

JUSTIN SPRING B&C PROFESSIONAL MEMBER DIRECTOR OF BIG GAME RECORDS Photos Courtesy of Author

your pa d th in

DIY

ARIZONA COUES’ DEER

n t u r e awa

The author is all grins after connecting with a high 90’s buck on an early October DIY hunt.

Whether the name Grey Ghost was

coined by the late Jack O’Connor, whose adventures and writing ignited an entire generation’s passion for hunting, really isn’t as important as the fact that the dean of outdoor writers (whose writing was known for its thrift) felt it worthy of mention. Living in the unique mountainous terrain of the desert southwest, this whitetail subspecies is the perfect quarry for hunters looking to expand their horizons. These deer are plentiful through much of their range, but as their nickname indicates, Coues’ deer can be very challenging to locate and stalk. LOCATION

A look at Boone and Crockett’s Trophy Search database over the last decade shows that Mexico leads in Coues’ entries, though Arizona is a close second, posting 70 typical entries since 2008. For those looking to experience a Coues’ deer hunt—or any first-time western hunt for that matter—don’t set your sights or expectations at the level of B&C minimum scores. Statistics show that you will be disappointed, though this doesn’t mean the data available from this source doesn’t affect you. Our Records Program is maintained to monitor wildlife management successes and failures on a continental scale. If an area produces book-caliber trophies, the overall population generally will be healthy. Even if you are just looking for a respectable specimen to fill the freezer or to learn new country and habitat, areas identified by the presence of top entries is an indicator that those particular counties should move up on your list as you narrow down your search. While Mexico offers great hunting for Coues’ deer and an amazing cultural experience, for hunters looking to do it on their own, Arizona and New Mexico are more straightforward in terms of organizing a hunt. When comparing the two states, New Mexico produces some very high quality Coues’ deer, though Arizona stands out as the best destination 62 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

North Americans are beyond fortunate in our ability to experience native wildlife and wild places.

for overall numbers (and ultimately, opportunity) to pursue the small whitetail. Both states are on a draw system, though a look at particular units in Arizona reveals that later-season rut hunts in December take a long time to draw, while an October hunt can be accomplished every year or two. Both my Arizona Coues’ deer hunts have been done on draws with two or less points, and both trips resulted in us bringing back a buck in the cooler. Especially for out-ofstate hunters, my best advice is learn the biologic basics of the species you are hunting. For hunting deer in the southwest, a great starting point is Jim Heffelfinger’s Deer of the Southwest. As you work your way through his book and start understanding Odocoileus virginianus couesi, you begin narrowing down the habitat you want to hunt. For this particular critter, you need to look at 4,000 feet in elevation and above. Another factor in Arizona, and pretty much any arid region for that matter (which covers most of the west), is sufficient water. Numerous platforms including onX Maps, many nonprofit wildlife

groups, etc., can help you locate guzzlers, stock tanks, and many of the manmade structures that, unfortunately, are required to sustain wildlife populations by supplying water on today’s landscape. Once you have a grasp on the habitat requirements, you can either begin looking for those particular traits and match them to Arizona hunting regulations for opportunity, or you can take a shortcut. When using Trophy Search, historical numbers are interesting, but I want to know what has been produced in the last 10 years or so. This last decade search reveals four top counties around the Tucson area: Pima, Gila, Cochise, and Santa Cruz. Now you can go through each county separately and identify the units that fall within the county or, through the purchase of an onX Maps membership, you can search the county and view the unit’s numbers on their platform. For Arizona, onX actually offers an overlay of the range of Coues’ deer that can be turned on in map layers that reveals the units in their range. From here, go to Arizona’s website and read up on

the units. One of the first things you will notice is a warning for hunters down close to the border. If you are cautious about the unknown aspect of illegal border activities and prefer to avoid it, stick to the units north of Interstate 10. If you are okay with this unknown, you do have a higher chance at a big deer, and generally speaking, better draw odds south. This is where planning gets fun. For this example, let’s assume you want to stay north. Comparing these units to the top counties can limit your search further, though Arizona’s website outlines what to expect. Once I have identified some units that sound intriguing, it’s time to look at the opportunities each offers. For this I use Trophy Search, looking at kill dates by clicking the expanded date information and at the counties that cover the units I am interested in hunting. For Coues’ deer, my data verifies that December is the rut and generally when the largest bucks are taken. When I researched the December hunt in the unit I was interested in, I saw that the draw odds for December were far lower. For example Unit 22

offered 400 permits the last week of October this year, 400 permits the second week of November, and 50 for the last two weeks of December. This is where you can get creative. Say for example your significant other has always wanted to be standing on a corner in Winslow, Arizona, and see if they can spot a girl in a flatbed Ford slowing down to take a look…. This is a great excuse to get some boots on the ground scouting—which can answer all your questions of a unit before

While the flora may be different than what you’re use to, it’s all beautiful though most of it in Coues’ habitat will stick you!

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 63

EXCERPT FROM ARIZONA’S HUNT PLANNING PAGE FOR UNIT 27 :

The largest whitetail deer population in Unit 27 is around the Mitchell Peak/Grey’s Peak area, and along the southern face of the Mogollon Rim. Hunters report good numbers of deer in these areas. In particular, some quality deer are found in the areas around Strayhorse Canyon and Raspberry Canyon. Walnut Tank west of the highway in this area is excellent, as well. All the areas east and west of the highway and down toward the larger canyons coming off the Mogollon Rim offer good whitetail hunting. This country is rough and steep, with very limited vehicle access. Hwy 191 runs between Mitchell and Grey’s Peak and climbs the Mogollon Rim at Blue Vista. The Big Lue Mountains are located on the southern edge of Unit 27. There is fair to good whitetail hunting here. These mountains are in what is commonly known as the Mule Creek/ Martinez area. Again, vehicle access is limited. Access north of the Big Lues is by Hwy 78. FR 212 will get you north of the Big Lues. Vegetation is pinyon-juniper with some open grassland. Robinson Mesa and Hot Air Canyon have a whitetail herd that is increasing in numbers. It can be accessed via FR 217, then by trail No. 37. The shortest access from Hwy 191 is from Sheep Saddle using trail No. 16, or west along trail No. 33 (East Eagle). Vegetation is pinyon-juniper, oak thickets, and chaparral. The area is very brushy, but there are plenty of trails. A hot spot is an area known locally as Walnut Tank. More populations of whitetail can be found throughout the rest of the unit, as well, although in much lower concentrations. For those lucky enough to draw a tag, it is a good idea to get out in the field and scout the area to locate where whitetail are abundant.

dedicating years to drawing the premium tag. With national forests, cave dwellings, the Grand Canyon, etc., there are many opportunities to combine a family vacation to Arizona with some scouting. In my case, my wife had no desire to burn vacation unless we were hunting, so we elected to draw an easier hunt in an earlier season— which, according to draw odds, was a top December unit—and go do a scouting hunt. This allowed us the opportunity to learn the unit and decide if we wanted to dedicate six to eight years of applications to a particular unit in the future. In our case, the first trip down was great, but we saw a lot of people hunting very hard, and the areas we found didn’t seem to be what we were looking for. My wife took a great buck on this hunt, and we were fortunate enough to have an Arizona resident show us the ropes of glassing, but we switched up units after this first trip and basically went through the above steps again. LESSONS

We learned so much on that first trip. It behooves the hunter to know that it may well take more than one hunt to get a new species. If you are putting all your eggs in one basket for a one-time hunt out west, the allin-one approach leaves many opportunities for you to be disappointed. Though, to me, the reward of figuring it out solo and enduring the fails along the way is a very important part of the hunting experience. Coues’ deer hunting is an optics game, plain and simple: 15x powers on a tripod is a must, and

sitting for extended periods is the key to success. If you haven’t learned how to grid an area with binos on a tripod, start practicing before you go. Once you have covered a canyon, start again. After learning this technique on Coues’ deer, we have found the technique useful on nearly all other species we pursue in open country. What we found is every canyon that had the necessary ingredients for Coues’ deer had Coues’ deer, though two or three hours of glassing may be required to see them move. First and last light had deer moving, and much was dictated by temps. Interestingly enough, we also found lunar tables to be useful in predicting Coues’ deer movement on our first trip, as no weather, rut, or any other factors seemed to be having an effect on movement times. Unsurprisingly, finding glassing points off the main roads that revealed habitat not visible from roads resulted in the most deer and highest number of bucks seen. Most units in Arizona, including ours, had ample forest service and BLM to roam, and studying topo lines helped us identify glassing points before ever reaching the unit. THE HUNT

My second trip started coming together after an acquaintance took a tremendous buck on a December hunt, and when I looked at the draw odds for the October tag for that unit, I found it easy to draw. The Tonto National Forest covered most of the area I was interested in—decent main access roads but

As daylight lit the canyon, I was awestruck.

The authors wife Rebecca poses with her first Coues’ whitetail on their first Arizona trip.

64 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

significant areas within an hour’s hike offered seclusion—so I applied. Arizona’s draw system is interesting, and it basically uses your first and second choices as a first choice, so you are included in the applicant pool whether you put down your unit first or second. There is always a chance to pull a great tag, so I put down the December hunt as choice one and the October hunt as choice two. July results told me I would be headed down in October. The weather forecast showed highs in the 90s, so we froze all our food then added frozen two gallon jugs and Nalgenes of water to our coolers. It was 19 hours to get to the first area I had identified through onX and Google Earth to hunt, so I left at noon a day and a half before the season was to open. A good friend who is always down for an adventure, though doesn’t really hunt much himself, agreed to go along. The drive was over 1,200 miles, and with gas at $3.25 a gallon put us at just under $200 each way. We made it through Montana, Idaho, and most of Utah before I hit the wall and paid about $100 for a hotel room to grab a quick four hours of sleep. Other than a couple gas stops and way too long of a stop at a Red Lobster in Utah for dinner, we pretty much drove constantly. I don’t

A small ridge just up the road from where we had camped appeared to offer a great high point for glassing.

remember exactly what time we hit the road that first morning, but by 7 a.m. we had made Arizona and were scouting by early afternoon. Unfortunately what I was looking for didn’t really exist in the first area I had identified during pre-scouting. There was habitat and we saw a few deer but the areas that seemed remote from Google Earth turned out to be rather easily accessed so after a few hours my number two spot became my better option. The drive down took significantly longer than I expected, and as we crawled up the Forest Service road, light was quickly fading. The road was rutted hard, driven by flash flooding that left huge, exposed rocks repeatedly testing the new tires I had bought a few weeks earlier. The west is not 4-ply or rental car-tire type terrain. Watching my elevation, I knew I was short of Coues’ habitat. As we crossed a major creek at a low-water crossing, I was feeling far more confident—there was water, and the access road was not easily navigated. We began climbing as soon as we made the crossing, and the road narrowed to about three-quarters of the width of my truck. I gripped the wheel tighter and tighter with each passing hole, rock, or arroyo as we crawled up the road. It was

long past dark by this point, and we approached 5,000 feet in elevation, according to the GPS. We hadn’t seen a flat spot, let alone a campsite for the last hour, so when we came to a cattle guard with a fence across the bypass to the left, I pulled the truck over and we leveled the vehicle the best we could. Originally my buddy Tony had planned to stay in a tent, but we both just crawled into our bags in the back of the truck. Sleep was rough for the few hours we had, so we rose well before daylight on opening day. We retrieved a couple partially frozen pre-made breakfast burritos that I tried to heat up on a propane grill as the percolator started chattering on the stove. As daylight lit the canyon, I was awestruck. Wanting to be on the glass at first light, I set up the tripod on the edge of the road and began breaking apart the countryside as light filled the canyon. A small ridge just up the road from where we had camped appeared to offer a great high point for glassing. A decent trail ran a couple hundred yards out the ridge where a huge flat rock hung off the end right before the topography dropped hundreds of feet to the creek bottom. Positioning my tripod on this rock, I had an unobstructed view for about 340 degrees. Within a few minutes I spotted a couple does coming up from the creek below and disappearing into a draw just out of sight. I stayed at this glassing point until about 10:30 that morning and saw a few more does before the heat of the day forced me back to the limited shade of the truck. That evening, as soon as the sun neared touching the ridge above us, we began the hot hike above the road to look over the top into another hidden basin to our west. By the time we reached the top,

the sun had dropped low enough that the canyon before us was in the early evening shadow and we soon picked out a couple more does feeding. We stayed at the lookout until dark, though we didn’t spot any more deer. The next day we hiked into the creek bottom to try to work up into the draw where the does had disappeared that morning. Calculating the distance from my GPS, I figured an hour would easily put us in a good position by daylight. Tony and I bailed off the ridge and were making good time until we neared the creek. Our headlamps only illuminated a few feet in front of us, and as I paused to ensure direction I put my foot on a boulder that instantly dislodged and tumbled into a black abyss. The canyon walls of the creek were nearly vertical, and while Tony was down to try it, I decided to hold up until daylight to ensure we could safely descend. Even after daylight, dropping into the creek was precarious, but we made great time once we hit the other side and soon found a small hill to glass up into the canyon. Nearly as soon as we set up, I spotted three bucks maybe 500 yards into the canyon. They were quickly moving about a small tree, almost running in a circle, preventing me from being able to accurately judge what any of them had for antlers, though none were huge. All of a sudden, the group split with each buck going a different direction and disappearing with a few bounds into the juniper. We stayed there until mid-morning when the heat of the day forced our retreat. Tony and I would move as quickly as possible from tree to tree, standing far closer to one another than made either of us comfortable, trying to recover in the limited available shade. FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 65

When we got back to the truck, nearly all the water in the cooler was at least twothirds thawed, and the ice cold water could have been the best tasting thing I have ever had. Surmising these deer had gone further up this canyon and not being extremely impressed with number of deer we had seen west of camp, I decided to make a move east as another road appeared on the map three or four miles in that direction and at what appeared to be the top edge of the canyon where the smaller bucks had headed. It took us a few hours to work around there, though the air conditioning felt good! The thermometer readings in the 90s confirmed this was the place to be sitting instead of glassing. By mid-afternoon, we had worked around the opposite side of the canyon and grabbed a quick bite of

lunch. Though it was still significantly hotter than I would prefer, we grabbed some binos and went for a short hike down into the brush. Within a couple hundred yards, I noticed a Coues’ shed on the ground. While sheds obviously don’t indicate where deer are in season vs. wintering, the size of the antler had me very excited as it was far better than I had hoped to find for a Coues’ buck. While we didn’t find any great location to glass in this particular canyon, we found ourselves at the head of a knife-backed ridge that appeared somewhat accessible for a scouting hike that evening to make a plan for the following morning. We followed through on this plan and couldn’t have been more than a quarter mile off the main road at a nice rock outcropping which provided

Dropping into the creek was precarious, but we made great time once we hit the other side and soon found a small hill to glass up into the canyon.

cover and a great vantage point. We soon surmised most folks were on this particular access road of the unit as ATV after ATV would drive by. As the afternoon shadows first invaded the bottom of the canyon maybe 45 minutes into our glassing, Tony tells me he sees a couple bucks below us and one is pretty good. As soon as I got the buck in the glass, I knew it was a shooter and in range. I quickly popped the binos off the tripod and placed my .25-06 on it for a rest. The first shot hit hard and he was down, but a couple follow-ups were necessary to ensure he was anchored. The recovery was fairly uneventful; the buck was soon field dressed, and we were heading up the hill again as light faded. It was good and dark with no moon as we neared where the truck should have been, but the juniper was thick and headlamps didn’t appear to be illuminating anything familiar. Tony and I paused to discuss which way to go but unfortunately did not agree. With both of us feeling

TOTAL COST

LICENSE/TAG: $475 FUEL: $400 HOTEL: $200 ICE/FOOD: $125 $1,200 BUCKS, FIVE DAYS, 95-INCH COUES’ DEER

extremely confident in our guess, I wasn’t quite sure how to proceed. I remembered I had my keys in my pocket. When I hit the unlock button, the headlights revealed we had navigated to within about 30 yards of the truck. After skinning the deer, temps were still in the 70s, and when I looked into the cooler to get some water, I saw that all our ice was gone on just the tail end of the second day of the season. Knowing it was so hot, we had no option but to get the deer back into a town to get some ice. n

NEXT UP: ALASKA CARIBOU

The author’s October buck. The recovery was fairly uneventful; the deer was soon field dressed, and the author was heading up the hill as light faded.

66 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

T H E N E W V I C TO R Y R F

DREAM NOWBLE A AVAIL

BIGGER

THE NEW VICTORY RF WITH BLUETOOTH CONNECTIVITY IS THE DREAM OF HARDCORE HUNTERS AND GUIDES QUICK AND ACCURATE RANGE AND REAL-TIME BALLISTIC DATA FROM 16-2500 YARDS

CONNECT TO THE ZEISS HUNTING APP ON YOUR MOBILE DEVICE VIA BLUETOOTH â&#x20AC;&#x201C; NO SD CARD NEEDED

STORE UP TO NINE CUSTOM BALLISTIC PROFILES

LEARN MORE AT ZEISS.COM/VICTORYRF FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 67

BEYOND THE SCORE

HOUNDSMEN AND

Angelo Baio Founder, Full Circle Outdoors Inc. Photos Courtesy of Author

BLACK WATER BEARS

Chris Douglas, Carolina All Out TV

The morning sun is just breaking through the treetops, shooting rays on my face. It’s cold for a North Carolina fall morning, and the sun’s warmth is a preamble for how hot it’s about to get. An earlier check of the game cams confirmed there’s a good bear in this block. I am posted in a specific spot; one picked by Doug Temple, the lead houndsman. He doesn’t talk much, but when he does, it’s in a low, southern grumble that’s the law for that moment. He drives away to take the lead while whoever’s left scrambles to a position along the long dirt road to form a line the bears are not to cross. I can feel the fever building. To the uninformed, it appears to be pure chaos: guns emerge from every truck, and there’s the unmistakable sound of steel while shells are racked into each chamber. Dogs left in truck boxes in reserve are no less tuned in, and whimpers turn to howls. This scene has been played out time and again for generations, but it never gets old. It’s orchestrated by the one man who knows the bear so well it’s been said he could be one. That man is the ultimate houndsman; a man who runs these swamps like his family has for four generations. That man is Pasquotank, North Carolina’s Doug Temple. 68 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

When newcomers find themselves immersed in the action for a single hunt, I believe they will instantly develop a love for the dogs and the sport. You can’t help but be drawn into the sounds and smells of the swamp and the thrill of the chase. To leave the dirt road and dive into the black water swamp, you feel as if you are entering a different world. These dogs and men literally put their lives and that of their dogs in pursuit of tradition. It’s a combination of human instinct, tradition and pride. It’s what they live for. THE GREAT DISMAL SWAMP

The 113,000-acre refuge has allowed deer hunting since 1979 and bear hunting since 2006. The majority of the wildlands are found in Virginia, but a reasonably-sized portion sweeps south into North Carolina. At one time, this landmass was covered by the sea, emerging from its depths after the last ice age. Folklore tells us that the black waters contain healing powers. It has been said that passing ships would make an intentional stop to stock up on its natural medicine waters. The water is high in natural acids leached from the detritus of the cypress, gum and juniper trees. The science behind it shows us that the high acid content inhibits the growth of bacteria

This column is dedicated to the system that supports the public hunting of public wildlife for all fair chase sportsmen, and the stories and trophies that are the result. Theodore Roosevelt strongly believed that selfreliance and pursuing the strenuous activities of hunting and wilderness exploration was the best way to keep man connected to nature. We score trophies, but every hunt is to some extent a way of measuring ourselves.

and was used not only for medicine but to help inhibit spoilage on a ship’s short journey. The swamp’s reputation is that of an impenetrable, bug-infested wasteland—except to the locals who grew to appreciate its beauty and the boundless wildlife it held to help sustain them. On this trip, I walk a mere pittance, constantly forced to my knees, deep in mud, tangled in vines and thorns that pull off clothing and cut my skin. Without a machete, it is almost impossible to make headway. As I claw and curse my way through it, it seems that nothing could survive here. When one stops for a moment and allows the silence to return, it comes back to life with the sounds of birds, squirrels and other signs of wildlife underfoot. Historical accounts tell of people taking refuge from whatever bad deed society claimed on them and counting on the swamp’s reputation to discourage pursuit. Let’s not forget the times when the Underground Railroad, formed by large colonies of free blacks coming to the aid of runaway slaves, found sanctuary in the swamp’s impenetrable depths. Eventually some would emerge to assimilate into communities, finding work in local lumber operations in exchange for silence about their whereabouts. THE TEMPLE FAMILY TREE

The Temple family history of running hounds goes back at least four generations—to the ‘20s and ‘30s. Originally, the Temples scratched a living from the soil by farming 15,000 acres of soybeans and corn. They supplemented their food stocks with wild meat harvested in the swamp. In the case of the Temples, it was usually swamp bear. In the beginning, a team of one hound per man was all that was needed. Having too many dogs was simply too many mouths to feed. Although hunting was more for subsistence than sport in that era, as time progressed and the need to supplement food with wild game became more of a bonus, the love for running hounds became as much a part of them as the family name. Today Doug Temple and his son Wade have a dog breeding program where they take the best their pack has to offer to work towards the perfect hound dog.

ABOVE: Bear claw marks on the tree. Bears are known to bite and scratch trees in territorial behavior. BELOW: Old photo of houndsman. The historic Temple family and crew showing off their best hounds (Provided by the Temple Family)

THE HOUNDSMAN LIFESTYLE

Doug Temple’s father was a second-generation farmer until the mid-70s when the family started into logging. Around the mid-90s they gave up farming altogether for logging full time. Today the Temples privately own about 2,000 acres, some of which borders the Great Dismal Swamp that they utilize for logging and hunting. Even as the years are creeping up on Doug, this quiet, modest man wears the scratches from thorns and brush on his face and hands as a badge of honor; evidence that he is still in the game and the patriarch of the family. FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 69

TOP:“Bungalow” as he prefers to be called, takes his role as “blocker” seriously. ABOVE: Patriarch Doug Temple takes five with his hounds. BELOW: Author Angelo Baio takes a bead at his treed black bear of a lifetime.

70 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Doug’s son Wade is following his father’s footsteps—a chip off the ol’ block if I ever saw one. While I was in camp for two days, it wasn’t often that you’d see him standing still. If he was not helping coordinate the men on his father’s commands on a hunt, he was tending game cameras, running bait to feed sites or tending to his camp guests. Like his father, he isn’t much on idle chatter. But when he speaks, it’s obvious he’s a sincere man. He honors his family and the traditions of hunting with hounds. He’s a true southern gentleman. The Temples’ version of a dog-breeding program was started by Wade’s grandfather, uncle and cousin John about 50 years ago. In the bear-hunting community, Plott hounds are technically considered the New World’s bear dog, yet they were first bred as Germany’s boar-hunting dog. They were brought to the new colony of North Carolina and found to have just the right scent-tracking skills and temperament to hunt bear. That versatility and toughness eventually had the breed named as the North Carolina state dog. Wade explains that he has a mix of hound dogs— Plott, Bluetick, an American original, and the American English coonhound, a mix breed of hounds brought to the south from abroad. Each has a skill and personality that helps formulate a pack worthy to hunt bear. Wade likes his pack to have a variety of skills; some need to be good scent trackers while others need to be good at bay. The dogs seem to be wild once loose, but in fact, they are tuned into the houndsman. They feed off each other’s tracking ability and communicate in a howl that can be identified by his master. A good houndsman can read his dog’s howl

individually, “just like your own kids’ voices,” Wade tells me. “They tell me what they see and smell, and I can tell them in my own voice what I see. If I get sight of a bear before they do, I can change my call and they’ll come to me and I can direct them to a bear.” Wade likes to have at least four pups in training at any one time. “They need to start young and train all year long.” Good habits are formed, and exemplary traits are enhanced when the dogs learn from each other. Wade will train his pack in North Carolina in the off-season but will follow the bear-hunting seasons from Maine to Virginia whenever possible. Maine and Virginia’s seasons are relatively short but come earlier in the year than North Carolina’s. Starting in Maine in September and working his way south with North Carolina’s split threeweek season that starts in November and ends in December lengthens the whole hunting experience for his dogs. When a bear is taken during a hunt as opposed to being treed and released in the off-season, it is safer for the dogs and men. Wade also explains that the only reward for the dog is to finally get their mouth on the bear—and a dead bear is all the better. “They need to know there’s something in it for them.” HOUNDSMAN/ CONSERVATIONIST, ONE IN THE SAME

“I help the farmers, by taking the bears before they can completely destroy cornfields,” Wade explains. Clearly this is a touchy subject as it is for almost any hunter. He tells me he is so disappointed to know that some folks just don’t accept that what he does is literally a service to the community and a testament to conservation. Hunting is necessar y to keep

balance—balance between a world that needs the farmer’s crop, the farmers who need an income, and the world that is better off having bears in it. The balance of nature has been thrown off kilter by human intervention. Wade feels that he would rather continue his family legacy and take a bear in a hunt to help sustain a healthy bear population, which, in turn, works in concert with bear management practices. Wade also self-regulates his own bear take and manages the bears to the best of his ability. During the season, he will feed more than 4,000 pounds of shelled peanuts a week during the period crops are ready to be harvested. Bears, if not re-directed to his stand sites, would devastate locally grown wheat, soybeans and peanuts, indiscriminately causing serious problems to a farmer’s livelihood. For a bear to get the same quantity of food he supplies in one isolated spot, a bear could devastate countless acres of farm fields and spoil even more. In many cases, bears will come into a field while the crop is topping out with a flower or bud that will produce a bean or seed and they nip it off before it matures, ruining the whole plant. RELEASE THE HOUNDS

In the distance, the howls of the dogs are getting louder, making their way to my position. I think they are headed my way, but I’m not sure, until a pickup truck flies by, washing us back into the brush with a dust cloud as its tires hammer over a washboard dirt road. I can hear the CB radio blasting commands from within that sounds like another language that only “they” understand. I’m standing on a twotrack dirt road raised from the black waters on both sides simply to make way through the divide of the Great Dismal

Swamp and private land. The bear knows no boundary; one side is sanctuary and a chance to overpopulate to become a farmer’s menace, and the other is a confrontation with a mass of teeth, fur and man. I was about as confused as the bear, frankly, with houndsman yelping at dogs their own unique sound of encouragement while the dogs communicate with a voice to which only their owners are attuned. We are running a block, an area of swamp confirmed by game cameras to have a good bear on it. When we pulled up in our vehicles, the dogs caught the scent of bear before we even got out of the trucks. Eight to ten men gather around the huntmaster for a quick plan, and then tear down the dirt road to take up a position “like they stole it.” When they stop, GPS collars are buckled onto the dogs, and they are cut loose. The dogs dive into the tangled thorn-infested swamp like bullets. The houndsman confirms his GPS. “It’s on, brother.” They claim they can tell an individual dog and what it’s doing by its howl. Within minutes, all hell breaks loose as the huntmaster claims he can tell from the dogs that a bear has been treed. He quickly confirms so with the GPS. Shots are ringing out by the blockers, and men are yelling their own whoop commands at the dogs while trucks are flying down the dirt road sliding sideways to get a chance to release their dogs held in reserve. They call it controlled chaos, and in spite of this not being my first time, my temperature went from simmer to boil in a microsecond. The houndsman I was closest to whips his truck up beside me while the dogs held in reserve are clawing to get out of the truck box and blasting howls in everyone’s face, begging for action. I can

ABOVE: Young pup focused on making his master happy. BELOW: Ole Smoke, the “Top Dog”

hardly hear myself think as the driver whizzes by and barks, “Gitcha gun, follow me.” It’s not a request; he’s dead serious. If you falter and a dog or man is hurt, I’m not so sure you could ever live that down. A boar is treed, and we have to get to the dogs as quickly as possible. Your heart is pounding in your ears so hard it almost drowns out the howls as you crawl, run or push your way under vines, water and thorn brush that’s pulling your clothes and gun

off your back and ripping at your face and hands. You’re almost like a dog yourself, face down and head to the sound. If that isn’t enough for a coronary, Chris Douglas of Carolina All Out TV, a seasoned hound-hunt veteran himself, is pulling up the rear and turns up the temp a bit when we pull up on the bear with a, “Whew, that’s a nice one.” All I could see is something bigger than two 55-gallon drums hanging 25-odd feet above our heads with dogs literally trying to climb the tree after it. As this FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 71

brute looms above our heads, the houndsman is right in the mix under the tree to make sure if the boar dives out and makes a break for it, his beloved dogs aren’t crushed or torn apart. From the words of our houndsman, “I don’t care who you are, how famous or how important; you don’t tell me. I’m right in there under that tree. No one gets between me and my dogs.” I have what I know will do the job cleanly, a Merkel MHR16 in 6.5x55 with a crystal clear Meopta scope on 3x power that this bear’s head fills up completely. As I pull the gun up, I recall a comment from the night before when I was having dinner with a father and son team from Maine who keep running dogs with the Temples’ pack, “Take a head shot. It saves the dogs—and men.” It seemed like slow motion. One minute I’m tearing through brush, dogs are climbing trees, men are yelling… and then the slightest push of recoil. Frankly, I never heard the gun go off. The bear rolls from the trunk of the tree and belly flops, arms stretched into the black water with a splash that literally rose 10 feet in the air, burying his head and half his body in thick, black mud. The dogs that aren’t tied are on

him in a flash, getting their due. Among the back-slaps, high-fives, knuckles and everything else I can think as the group makes their way to us in the brush, all I can do is stare at the bear and the dogs. When we finally dragged the bear back to the truck with a log winch, it took more than six men to get it in the truck. Later on the scales, it weighed in at 570 pounds. The meat is divided among the men; nothing was wasted. In retrospect, this wasn’t really my hunt; it was theirs. About three or four days later, I heard that one of Wade’s prize dogs, 8-year-old Smoke, a dog who was right there with me the whole time leading the pack, died of kidney failure. Never a phone call or a note in text, Wade quietly posts it on Facebook for anyone who would have any interest, anyone who had hunted with ole Smoke. R.I.P Smoke. The bluetick was my GPS before they came out. Was a truck-to-tree dog and fast. All you had to do was listen to him and know who was in front. Could take an 8-hr.-old track and trail faster than most dogs could run. Thanks, Smoke. n

RIGHT: Author Angelo Baio (L) Wade Temple (M) and Doug Temple (R) with his bear. BELOW: Author Angelo Baio with his 575-pound North Carolina black bear. His bear is also listed in this issues Recently Accepted Trophies on page 81.

72 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

NOTE FROM B&C’S BIG GAME RECORDS DEPARTMENT: The use of dogs in conjunction with a hunt does not necessarily disqualify a trophy entry. The use of dogs has been a very important tradition and tool in wildlife management in certain areas, and for certain species. They are also very prized by their owners, often requiring a significant investment and countless hours of training. In terms of the Fair Chase requirements, you must have been present on the hunt when the hounds were released and IF electronic collars were used (which is nearly every hound hunt) the Club will request a narrative to accompany the entry to ensure the harvest was not because of the collars.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 73

JUDGES PANELS It’s hard for me to believe that when you start receiving this we will be less than two months away from the close of another awards program. At this point, the 30th Awards is shaping up to be our third-best Awards Program for number of entries received—trailing only the 27th and 28th . November 2, 2018, is the final day a trophy can be harvested and be eligible for entry into the 30th Awards Program—assuming it is cleaned and placed at a habitable room temperature (roughly 60° F) that day and then maintained there until the time of measurement on December 31; this year the date falls on a Monday. Also of note is that if the trophy is taken in the afternoon on November 2, it could not be scored until after that time on December 31. If a trophy is taken on the second, the first day is not until 24 hours later on the third. Keep in mind that to be included in this awards period, the entry must be postmarked by December 31, 2018.

TROPHY TALK

As has been mentioned in this column before, please send in all entries as soon as possible as we inevitably receive a large influx right near the deadline, and all these must be reviewed prior to us being able to complete our invite lists. Early invitations will be going out to the 12 trophies that are currently in the Awards Period exceeding the current All-time top-ten ranking in their respective categories. Regardless of the numbers and scores of entries in a category, all top-ten qualifiers must be panel-verified. While I know it has been written up before, and all Official Measurers were instructed on how panel judging takes place, I feel it is appropriate to review the purpose and procedure for any new readers of Fair Chase. Many trophy owners form a bond with the measurer, and the measurer will get questions concerning panel measurement when folks start receiving invitations for their qualifying trophies. The main

purpose of panel judging is to ensure the original scoring was done correctly. Our intention is not to penalize a trophy for the normal shrinkage that can take place in the one, two, three or possibly even four or more years since the trophy was taken. While identifying normal shrinkage is not the purpose of panel verification, we do have a shrinkage allowance that we know is commonly seen over this time that is taken into account when reviewing a score. If the panel finds a discrepancy in which the trophy may increase in score, even if it’s only one-eighth of an inch, that change is updated. Generally speaking, the majority of trophies sent in are confirmed at their original entry scores. Of those that change, an equal percentage goes slightly up or down at every Judges Panel I have been involved in over the last decade. Each trophy is scored independently by two separate teams of two measurers. Each measurer turns in the score

Richard Hale, Chair of the Big Game Records Committee, talks with a group of Official Measurers in Springfield, Missouri during the 29th Big Game Awards Judges Panel.

74 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

JUSTIN SPRING B&C PROFESSIONAL MEMBER Director of Big Game Records

chart to the panel chairman. Their addition and subtraction is verified by records staff and any discrepancies between the two teams are then highlighted. The panel chairman pulls in both teams to discuss the differences. Once both teams of judges agree and sign off on the correct measurements, the panel chairman compares their charts with the entry chart to identify discrepancies, confirm the entry score, or identify any necessary corrective measures. In most cases, the majority of the original measurements are accepted with only the erroneously taken measurements being replaced by panel measurements. If a discrepancy arises amongst the teams, the entire panel will get together to discuss the issue. If the panel cannot agree, the final decision lies with the Records Committee and its chairman

on correct procedure. In addition to the top-invited trophies, and as we have done since the 27th Awards Program, we will be honoring any youth hunter age 16 or younger whose trophy was entered and accepted in the current Awards Period. These scores are generally not panel verified unless they also fall in the top of the category. We do ask they are sent in prior to the panel judging, which will take place April 23-27, 2019, so they can be included in the trophy exhibit. While we hope all the youth can send their trophy for display, young hunters are still welcome to attend even if their trophy isn’t on display. If you know of a youth with a trophy or are concerned we may not have flagged a youth entry you submitted, please talk to the hunter or contact us to ensure we invite all accepted youth entries that qualify. Bass Pro Shops and now also Cabela’s have generously offered to allow the use of the store-to-store transfer to get invited trophies to Springfield, Missouri, where the 30th Big Game Awards Program will take place August 1-3, 2019. The trophy owner is responsible for getting their trophy crated, but once the trophy is crated, they just drop it off at their nearest Cabela’s or Bass Pro store after

confirming with the Boone and Crockett Club Records Department. It is very important the trophy owners let us know as soon as possible if they are intending to attend and submit a photo via email of their mount. While we have plenty of space, we want to ensure the trophy display is tastefully done with all trophies equally highlighted. Beyond the photos, we will also produce unique shipping labels allowing us to track the trophies’ routes to Springfield. The tentative schedule of events is going to be very similar to the 29th Awards Program which was also held in Springfield in 2016. This includes a welcome reception for all attendees on Thursday night; the Jack Steele Parker Generation Next banquet, which honors all the young hunters in attendance who entered a qualifying trophy, on Friday night; and the Saturday night banquet honoring all those invited in attendance who entered a trophy qualifying in the top of each category. We will be hosting a Field Generals Luncheon to honor the dedication and hard work of our volunteer Official Measurers. All OMs in attendance will be receiving lunch, a presentation given by the current Big Game Records Committee Chairman Dr. Richard Hale, and an

CHATFIELD, MINNESOTA - OCTOBER 5-8, 2018

event-specific keepsake. The previous honorees all left with a Montana Silversmith custom belt buckle (pictured above). We invite all our Official Measurers to not only attend the Official Measurer activities, but also attend the other events to show support for those hunters participating in fair-chase hunting and ensuring the future of wildlife in North America. Combine these events with the other lunches, auctions, raffles, the world-class Johnny Morris’ Wonders of Wildlife National Museum and Aquarium which is also the current home of Boone and Crockett’s National Collection of Heads and Horns, Springfield’s proximity to other popular destinations such as the White River

Official Measurers in attendance at the Field Generals Luncheon at the 29th Big Game Awards Program received this custom belt buckle.

WELCOME NEW OFFICIAL MEASURERS CHATFIELD, MINNESOTA OCTOBER 5-8, 2018 Barry Denison - Deepwater, MO Mike C. Umbdenstock - Evansville, IL Kodyz Wohlers - Council Bluffs, IA Oviedo Baca - Chihuahua, MX Michael Lamb - Noble, IL Matthew V. Olson - Columbus, OH Kyle Clark - Metairie, LA Cody M. Belknap - Mediapolis, IA Joshua Druen - Canmer, KY Steve Cowles - Elmsford, NY William J. Dixon - Fairbank, IA Clifton Erickson - Bismark, ND Matthew J. Hentrick - Dayton, OH Jamie Kelly - Canton, MN Stephen LePage - Lewistown, MT Travis Paul - Corning, IA Christopher E. Scott - Lancaster, PA Mark Siekierski - Oxford, WI Josh Weltz - Sioux City, IA John S. Workman - Fordland, MO Joseph C. Yosick - Shelby, OH FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 75

Resort, and the ever-popular Branson, Missouri, and this event promises to offer something for the whole family. The display of bighorn sheep is shaping up to be the best of its kind in recent history because not only will the current World’s Record bighorn sheep be there, but other invited rams—three other 200-inch-plus rams from Montana, including another Montana ram taken in 2017 by young hunter Justin Sheedy that ties the previous hunter-taken bighorn record entered by Guinn Crousen in 2000. Staying on the theme of sheep, as I mentioned the newly renovated National Collection of Heads and Horns is displayed here. In its new home, Boone and Crockett’s Director of Publications Julie Tripp and Assistant Director of Big Game Records Kyle Lehr have spent countless hours working with Bass Pro Shops to ensure the signage and overall look closely mimics how the collection was displayed in its original home at the Bronx Zoo at the turn of the 20th century.. The collection includes the legendary L.S. Chadwick Stone’s sheep—which has been called by many the greatest North American big game trophy ever taken; the World’s Record pronghorn donated by Mike Gallo at the 29th Awards and mounts that were in the original Bronx Zoo collection makes this the greatest and most historically significant collection of big game in the world. While hunting seasons in some areas are winding down, and in others you are right in the thick of it, when you get around to reading this magazine with the most recent season’s memories still fresh in your mind, start making plans to attend the event, and continue supporting the organization and system that has been fighting since 1887 for wildlife and their habitats. More information including firm dates, prices, discounted hotel room info, and surrounding activities will be arriving in your email and mailbox shortly. We truly hope you can all attend. n

Each time an OM signs up a B&C Associate we’ll put a credit by their name. HERE’S THE BREAKDOWN 3 Associates – $25 off any item in the B&C store 5 Associates – Buck Knife 10 Associates – B&C Boyt sling 25 Associates – OM Wool Vest 50 Associates – Sitka Gear (value up to $350)

75 Associates – Yeti cooler and rambler package (value up to $500) 100 Associates – Congratulations! YOU’LL RECEIVE A KIMBER RIFLE! NOTE: Limit to one rifle per year, three rifles per Official Measurer.

76 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Associate Sign-Up Incentive Program Leader Board *As of October 18, 2018

CONGRATS TO OUR TOP PRIZE-WINNERS! Stanley Zirbel – 42 Bucky Ihlenfeldt – 34 Charlie Adams – 20 Ken Witt – 18 Daniel A. Doughty III – 13 Philip A. Herrnberger – 11 Jerry E. Lunde – 11 Mark Miller – 10 Jim R. Peterson – 7 Ralph Stayner – 6 Ab England – 5 Carl Frey – 5 Michael Moline – 5 John Bogucki – 4 Roger Kingsley – 4

Chris Lacey – 4 Robert Novosad – 4 Harrell Wilson – 4 Mike Golightly – 3 Daniel Hollingsworth – 3 Stacee Kleinsmith – 3 Joe Lacefield – 3 Marvin D. LaRose – 3 Ron Madsen – 3 Toby Montgomery – 3 John Ohmer – 3 Tim Rozewski – 3 Gary Wegner – 3 Brent Wilkes – 3 Robert Wood – 3

2 ASSOCIATE SIGN-UPS

Ricky D. Addison, Thomas E..Baine, Mark Bara, Don Biggs, Bob Black, Richard A. Bonander, Carl E. Brent, Jason Browning, Buck Buckner, John Busic, Brent Christensen, L. Victor Clark, Chad A. Coburn, Tim Donnelly, Dane K. Eider, Wyatt Goring, Hub Grounds, Arthur F. Hayes, Everett Headley, Gilbert Hernandez, John Hooten, Gary R. Howard, Stephen J. Hutton, Bill Nash, Jr., Clay Newcomb, Will Ogden, John Ramsey, Wayne Rodd, Eric M. Rominger, Eric Stanosheck, John Stein, Michael Trujillo, Gerry Wegner, Jim Williams, Jennifer Wood

1 ASSOCIATE SIGN-UP

Grant Adkisson, T.K. Atkinson, Brandon Baker, Mike Barrett, Erik Bartholomew, Michael Beaty, Steve Boero, Richard Burley, Dean H. Cook, Stephen L. Cook, Scott G. Corley, Brian Dam, Barry Dampman, Bob Davies, Robert Deis, John J. Detjen, Chad Dillabough, James Dowd, Randal Dufault, Tracy Dunkin, Gary D. English, Mark A. Erspamer, Luke Finney, Kevin Freymiller, Ronnie Gadberry, Valdemar Garcia, HP Giger, TJ Gould, Robert Graber, Tony J. Grabowski, Clifford Gray, Len Guldman, Jeffrey Gunnels, Charles Harden, Donald Haseley, Everett Headley, Tony Heil, Steve Hooper, Tim Humes, Richard E. Johndrow, Walter E. Johnson, Derris R. Jones, Mark Jones, Rory Karczewski, William A. Keebler, Daniel Kunz, Edward Larimer, Clinton Latham, Neil Lawson, Macy Ledbetter, John Legnard, Larry Lueckenhuff, Dean Marguardt, Bria Martin, James W. Martin, Corey Mason, Micah Mauney, James McCloskey, Richard McDrew, Steve McMillen, Gary Mefford, Thomas Milne, Skip Moore, George M. Moore, Corey Neill, Ronald Newman, James Newport, Robert Newton IV, Brian Nietzel, Matt Nilsen, Frank S. Noska, Don Patterson, Don Perrien, Ron G. Pesek, Richard A. Pflanz, John Phillips, Mike Pillow, Ryan Rauscher, Joe Ream, Ronald S. Richman, Ken J. Rimer, Wayne Rodd, Arnold V. Sandoval, Michael W. Schlegel, Kevin Schilling, Jeffrey L. Schneider, Glen Sellsted, Curtis P. Smiley, Ted Spraker, Ralph C. Stephen, Kelly Stockdale, Darrel Sudduth, Ed Swanson, Stephen C. Swihart, Jr., Jerry L. Tkac, Victor Trujillo, Brent Trumbo, Tony Vidrine, Gary Villnow, Gene A. Wagner, Jr., Lee Wahlund, William Walters, Bill Ward, Brad Zundel

Current Associates! Would you like to give an Official Measurer credit for your renewal? Let them know when it is your time to renew and they will provide their OMID number to include with your renewal so they will receive credit.

WE KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE TO LEARN FROM THE BEST.

WE KNOW THE GREAT OUTDOORS. WE LOVE THE GREAT OUTDOORS. We’ve come together for fish and wildlife, and conserving the places they call home. We’re working together for the traditions we’ve inherited and must pass on. We stand together for you, with good people, great gear, fair prices, and an experience second only to the Great Outdoors itself. PROUD PARTNER

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 77 BP181751

JACK STEELE PARKER

GENERATION

NEXT FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

BLACK BEAR 20 20 20 20

8/16 7/16 3/16 2/16

Oneida Co., WI Portage Co., WI Price Co., WI Washburn Co., WI

Hunter J. Krusmark Landen J. Kostuch Gavin L. Wright Brady C. Abitz

2016 2017 2017 2017

C. Collins T. Heil J. Ramsey M. Miller

The Boone and Crockett Club would like to celebrate young hunters who have embraced the outdoor way of life and embody the spirit of fair chase hunting. The following is a list of the most recent big game trophies accepted into Boone and Crockett Clubâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 30th Big Game Awards Program, 2016-2018, that have been taken by a youth hunter (16 years or younger). All of the field photos in this section are from entries that are listed in this issue and are shown in bold orange text. This listing represents only those trophies accepted since the Fall 2018 issue of Fair Chase was published.

GRIZZLY BEAR 25 2/16

Nass River, BC

Cole A. Findley

2017

D. Hart

COUGAR 15 6/16 Idaho Co., ID Alyssa N. Madden 2017 M. Schlegel TYPICAL MULE DEER 193 5/8 206 6/8 184 7/8 189 5/8

Cassia Co., ID Marvin A. Hale 1970 R. Hatfield San Miguel Co., NM Jake T. Davidson 2017 M. Lange

NON-TYPICAL MULE DEER 224 1/8 230 1/8

Mohave Co., AZ

Aspen L. Mathis

2017

M. Zieser

TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER 173 172 1/8 172 167 3/8 164 4/8 164 4/8 162 161 2/8 161 1/8 160 1/8

188 1/8 176 7/8 185 7/8 175 1/8 171 175 5/8 169 7/8 169 3/8 175 7/8 164 4/8

Pueblo Co., CO Halifax Co., VA St. Francis Co., AR Mille Lacs Co., MN Caldwell Co., KY Douglas Co., MN Fillmore Co., MN Chippewa Co., WI Louisa Co., IA Otter Tail Co., MN

Jacob E. Musso Dalton G. Womble Dale H. Davis Leroy C. Damar Drake C. Reynolds Carter J. Hoppe Dominic S. Drost Cole B. Schwab Alex E. Boysen Dawson R. Smith

2017 2017 2017 1963 2017 2017 2017 2016 2014 2017

G. Adkisson D. Boland D. Doughty M. Beaufeaux R. Huskey T. Kalsbeck C. Pierce J. Lunde C. Coburn T. Kalsbeck

Dawson R. Smith

NON-TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER 225 4/8 209 1/8 198 196 1/8 191 3/8 190 7/8

231 5/8 219 2/8 201 4/8 203 1/8 203 7/8 197 5/8

Montgomery Co., IA James B. Sifford Washington Co., TX McKenzie L. Tiemann Jefferson Co., IN Hunter T. Willoughby Coffey Co., KS Jacob H. Hawkins Osage Co., MO Rachel M. Woehr Franklin Co., MS Joseph B. Blalock

2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017

S. Grabow G. Pleasant R. Karczewski G. Moore L. Lueckenhoff G. Wilson

PRONGHORN 82 6/8 82 4/8 80

83 6/8 83 5/8 80 1/8

Natrona Co., WY Cascade Co., MT Box Elder Co., UT

Ashten B. Coffey Matthew D. Lencioni Hunter D. Harrow

2017 2017 2017

R. Bonander R. Burtis R. Hall

ROCKY MOUNTAIN GOAT 50

50 1/8

Wallowa Co., OR

78 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Lonnie A. Lay

2017

T. Rozewski

Jake T. Davidson

Cole A. Findley

Ashten B. Coffey Aspen L. Mathis Alyssa N. Madden

Brady C. Abitz

RECORD BOOK READY.

Since 1992, NightforceÂŽ riflescopes have won more matches and set more records in long-range competition than any other brand. To the hunter, this means you can be assured of realizing every ounce of accuracy your rifle can produce. It means having confidence in precise shot placement and

humane kills, whether the distance to your target is measured in a handful of yards or in hundreds of meters. Then, when your trophy appears, all you need to worry about is your nerves.

336 Hazen Lane, Orofino, ID 83544 n 208.476.9814 n Learn more at NightforceOptics.com

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 79

RECENTLY ACCEPTED TROPHIES The following pages list the most recent big game trophies accepted into Boone and Crockett Clubâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 30th Big Game Awards Program, 2016-2018, which includes entries received between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018. All of the field photos in this section are from entries that are listed in this issue and are shown in bold green text. This listing represents only those trophies accepted since the Fall 2018 issue of Fair Chase was published.

80 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

30 BIG GAME AWARDS TH

LISTING AND PHOTO GALLERY Robert L. Heisler was on an archery hunt near South Saskatchewan River, Saskatchewan, in 2017 when he took this non-typical mule deer scoring 245-3/8 points.

TOP TO BOTTOM

While on a 2017 archery hunt in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, Jason R. Strohl took this black bear scoring 22-9/16 points.

BEAR & COUGAR FINAL SCORE

LOCATION

BLACK BEAR - WORLDâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S RECORD SCORE 23-10/16

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

22 15/16 Greene Co., NY Joseph E. Diemer 2017 22 13/16 Tioga Co., NY Dakota W. Relyea 2017 22 10/16 Wadena Co., MN Jesse S. Koskiniemi 2017 22 9/16 Schuylkill Co., PA Jason R. Strohl 2017 22 9/16 Warren Co., NJ Ross H. Bockbrader 2017 22 7/16 Warren Co., NJ Ross H. Bockbrader 2017 22 Carteret Co., NC Herman C. Thomas III 2010 21 15/16 Manistee Co., MI Jeffrey M. Kresnak 2017 21 15/16 Mille Lacs Co., MN Jacob A. Vlieger 2016 21 14/16 Gila Co., AZ James J. Pyburn 2017 21 13/16 Eau Claire Co., WI Picked Up 2017 21 12/16 Pine Co., MN Derrick A. Orr 2015 21 9/16 Burnett Co., WI Dale C. Marker 2017 21 8/16 Coconino Co., AZ Jack H. Lutch 2017 21 6/16 Barron Co., WI Roel D. Koehn 2015 21 6/16 Sawyer Co., WI Andrew P. Callow 2017 21 4/16 Bedford Co., PA Mark C. Kunkle 2017 21 4/16 Menominee Co., MI Matthew T. Veeser 2017 21 3/16 Aitkin Co., MN Joseph S. Lien 2017 21 3/16 Chippewa Co., WI Craig J. Goettl 2017 21 2/16 Beacon Lake, SK David W. Stuhr 2014 21 2/16 Rusk Co., WI William L. Schaefer 2017 21 2/16 Tazewell Co., VA Gavan W. Yates 2016 21 Dolores Co., CO Guy S. Cochran 2017 21 Jones Co., NC Shelton W. Heath 1990 21 Langlade Co., WI Michael S. Zinda 2017 21 Portage Co., WI Hayden A. Davidowski 2017 21 Tyrrell Co., NC Lemuel L. Evans, Jr. 2017 20 15/16 Elk Co., PA Kenneth B. Reese 2013 20 15/16 Winnipeg River, MB Jared N. 2017 Anderson-Moncrief 20 14/16 Carteret Co., NC Michael S. Blasius 2017 20 13/16 Forest Co., WI Lisa S. Gretzinger 2017 20 12/16 Douglas Co., NV Brandon L. 2017 Mondragon 20 12/16 Luzerne Co., PA Edward J. Bieleski 2003 20 12/16 Pasquotank Co., NC Angelo J. Baio 2017 20 11/16 Navajo Co., AZ Brandon J. Haag 2017 20 10/16 Amador Co., CA Brian C. Jones 2013 20 10/16 Nepisguit River, NB Jason G. Blinn 2017 20 9/16 Blair Co., PA Robert S. Black 2017 20 8/16 Clinton Co., NY Kevin M. Rego 2017 20 6/16 Gates Co., NC Dalton M. Parker, Jr. 2017 20 6/16 Lac La Ronge, SK Michael W. Stanley 2017 20 6/16 South Thompson Shawn W. MacDonald 2018 River, BC 20 6/16 Pine Co., MN Jeffrey D. Henrichs 2017 20 6/16 Venango Co., PA Joseph G. Gatto 2017 20 5/16 Fentress Co., TN Edward A. Purvis 2017 20 5/16 Kalkaska Co., MI Douglas S. Draeger 2017 20 5/16 Kuiu Island, AK Dave P. Ouwinga 2002 20 4/16 Leelanau Co., MI Mark C. Steimel 2017 20 4/16 Madison Co., AR Tracy W. Floyd 2017 20 4/16 Mesa Co., CO Bryan D. Hamacher 2017 20 4/16 Stevens Co., WA James J. Chavez 2017 20 3/16 Grant Co., OR Jesse S. Madden 2015 20 3/16 Gunnison Co., CO Andrew S. Ware 2017 20 3/16 Kanawha Co., WV John E. Cooper III 2017 20 3/16 Marinette Co., WI Trevor J. Olson 2017 20 3/16 Swan River, MB James C. Carlson 2017 20 2/16 Avery Co., NC Lenny T. Smathers 2017 20 2/16 Bayfield Co., WI Kurtis B. Blake 2017 20 2/16 Sevier Co., UT J. Kelly Doyle 2017 20 1/16 Rio Arriba Co., NM Coltin B. Dickamore 2017 20 1/16 Rusk Co., WI Anthony L. Weigand 2016 20 Hyde Co., NC Jonathan A. Pomp 2015 20 Montrose Co., CO Chad A. Best 2016 20 LeConte Bay, AK Ryan A. Orel 2017

A. McBride D. Haseley M. Harrison D. Lynch K. Griglak K. Griglak H. Atkinson B. Novosad D. Ohman E. Fanchin J. Lunde S. Grabow K. Zimmerman M. Golightly J. Lunde K. Zimmerman D. Lynch D. Wellman J. Zins J. Lunde S. Godfrey J. Ramsey D. Boland J. Gardner M. Jones T. Heil P. Jensen J. Turner J. Medeiros E. Parker

This cougar, scoring 14-13/16 points, was taken by B&C Associate Carl A. Hansen while hunting in Gallatin County, Montana, in 2014. He was shooting a .30-30 Winchester. Rondo Hernandez, Jr., took this typical American elk, scoring 360-1/8 points, in 2017 while hunting in Big Horn County, Wyoming.

H. Hall T. Heil J. Capurro R. Kingsley K. Lehr N. Lawson R. Tupen C. Harrison K. Zimmerman R. Johndrow J. Turner M. Moline E. Swanson C. Ferrell D. Bastow D. Weddle B. Novosad B. Novosad M. Heeg A. Lipper M. Moline R. Spaulding T. Rozewski D. Weddle T. Dowdy S. Zirbel C. Rehor D. Ray J. Hjort D. Nielsen J. Wall J. Lunde R. Silvester A. Cramer L. Fredrickson

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 81

GRIZZLY BEAR - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 27-13/16 26 25 3/16 24 7/16 23

Golsovia River, AK Station Creek, AK Unalakleet River, AK Seventymile River, AK

Braxton M. Taylor James T. Proctor W. David Howton Daniel M. Macerelli

2017 2016 2017 2017

J. Wall W. Bowles B. Novosad D. Razza

ALASKA BROWN BEAR - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 30-12/16 28 26 10/16 26 2/16 26 1/16

Uyak Bay, AK Ugashik Lake, AK Moffet Point, AK Yakutat Bay, AK

Terry L. Combs Ronald Shimborski Todd D. Wastell Joseph M. Letarte

2016 2016 1999 2009

G. Howard S. Cook B. Nash A. Jubenville

Carbon Co., WY Tyler O. Willis 2017 Bull Mt., BC Shane C. Jensen 2017 Black Rock Mt., AB Jesse N. Haynes 2017 Jumping Pound Charles C.J. 2018 Creek, AB Cartwright Judith Basin Co., MT Chad C. Skelton 2018 Lakit Lake, BC Clinton M. Bostock 2017 Washoe Co., NV Casey O. Jones 2017 Bonner Co., ID Christopher P. Corlew 2018 Gallatin Co., MT Carl A. Hansen 2014 Cibola Co., NM Danny L. Pickell 2015 Sweet Grass Co., MT Curtis A. Hopp 2017 Lewis and Clark Todd K. Kuxhaus 2017 Co., MT Idaho Co., ID Martin C.R. Rose 2016

B. Davies D. Turchanski D. Skinner C. Dillabough

COUGAR - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 16-4/16 15 8/16 15 8/16 15 6/16 15 4/16 15 2/16 15 1/16 15 14 14/16 14 13/16 14 12/16 14 11/16 14 10/16 14 8/16

G. Taylor E. Swanson C. Lacey R. Johndrow B. Zundel S. Petkovich K. Farmer J. Pallister M. Schlegel

ELK & MULE DEER FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

TYPICAL AMERICAN ELK - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 442-5/8 422 4/8 429 387 6/8 400 3/8 381 4/8 398 1/8 378 1/8 392 2/8 375 5/8 382 7/8 367 3/8 405 4/8 366 3/8 398 4/8 365 370 6/8 360 1/8 369 6/8

San Carlos Indian Res., AZ Strasbourg, SK Teton Co., MT Gila Co., AZ Garfield Co., UT Kern Co., CA Oneida Co., ID Catron Co., NM Big Horn Co., WY

Anthony H. 2017 Osterkamp, Jr. Kevin N. Lofgren 2017 Picked Up 2018 James P. Mellody, Jr. 2017 Grant A. Medlin 2017 Clifton R. Machado 2017 David R. Harrow 2017 Joseph R. Faulks 2017 Rondo Hernandez, Jr. 2017

J. Pallister G. Sellsted M. Opitz W. Keebler W. Bowles J. Bugni R. Hall A. Sternagel D. Hart

NON-TYPICAL AMERICAN ELK - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 478-5/8 433 3/8 452 1/8 424 6/8 435 6/8 421 436 1/8 419 3/8 438 6/8 414 4/8 426 3/8 397 1/8 412 3/8 396 3/8 408 1/8 396 2/8 414 5/8 392 6/8 406 3/8 387 3/8 399 4/8 385 4/8 406

TOP TO BOTTOM:

This non-typical American elk, scoring 396-2/8 points, was taken by Teri K. Jones in Blaine County, Idaho, on a hunt in 2017. She was shooting a .30-06 Springfield. B&C Associate Tyson J. Mackin was on a hunt near Porcupine Hills, Alberta, when he harvested this typical mule deer scoring 192-6/8 points. B&C Associate Steven M. Frost took this non-typical mule deer, scoring 230-4/8 points, in Saguache County, Colorado, in 2017.

82 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

Allan, SK Hualapai Indian Res., AZ Centre Co., PA Big Horn Co., MT San Carlos Indian Res., AZ Jefferson Co., ID White Pine Co., NV Blaine Co., ID Elko Co., NV White Pine Co., NV Unknown

Darrick J. Gross Mike L. Ronning

2017 D. Pezderic 2017 M. Zieser

Ronald W. Marney, Jr. 2017 Thomas J. Komberec 2017 Anthony H. 2011 Osterkamp, Jr. Richard L. Cherry 2011 Michael T. Kinney 2017 Teri K. Jones 2017 Steven E. Gauvin 2017 Emilee A. Almberg 2017 Unknown 1900

T. Ross E. Headley W. Keebler M. Demick C. Lacey K. Hatch D. Birdsall S. Sanborn E. Headley

ROOSEVELT’S ELK - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 404-6/8 330 6/8 308 5/8 305 304 7/8

350 5/8 317 1/8 310 1/8 314 3/8

Del Norte Co., CA Yamhill Co., OR Jefferson Co., WA Jefferson Co., WA

Charlie A. Billett John P. Goforth David O. Cowan David O. Cowan

2017 2017 2016 2015

H. Wilson T. Rozewski D. Sanford D. Sanford

TULE ELK - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 379 287 7/8 293 5/8 Monterey Co., CA 274 1/8 286 San Luis Obispo Co., CA

Joseph W. Vaughan 2017 J. Bugni Dwight W. Gochenaur 2017 J. Creamer

TYPICAL MULE DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 226-4/8 202 1/8 207 4/8 200 5/8 210 6/8 200 4/8 208 5/8 197 5/8 199 196 5/8 201 1/8 196 2/8 203 7/8 193 2/8 208 5/8 193 1/8 203 4/8 192 6/8 201 6/8 192 3/8 198 4/8 192 3/8 202 191 6/8 201 1/8 191 3/8 198 1/8 191 198 6/8 191 208 190 6/8 194 190 5/8 196 1/8 190 5/8 196 6/8 190 194 4/8 188 6/8 190 4/8 187 7/8 198 2/8 186 7/8 191 1/8 186 193 5/8 185 4/8 189 5/8 184 5/8 186 6/8 184 4/8 190 2/8 183 2/8 188 7/8 183 1/8 189 4/8 183 186 2/8 181 6/8 188 3/8 180 7/8 186 4/8 180 6/8 187 180 5/8 184 2/8 180 2/8 187 5/8

Park Co., CO Jamieson Lake, AB Lincoln Co., WY Eagle Co., CO Coconino Co., AZ Shaunavon, SK Battle Creek, SK Mohave Co., AZ Porcupine Hills, AB Hualapai Indian Res., AZ Uintah Co., UT Hazlet, SK Summit Co., CO Coconino Co., AZ Wasco Co., OR Pakowki Lake, AB Kenilworth Lake, AB Peace River, AB Gunnison Co., CO Archuleta Co., CO Hamilton Co., KS La Plata Co., CO Bulrush Lake, SK Garfield Co., UT Moffat Co., CO Garfield Co., CO Jefferson Co., CO Eagle Co., CO Eagle Co., CO Eagle Co., CO Sonora, MX Tuolumne Co., CA Elko Co., NV Mesa Co., CO

Picked Up Dale R. Veno Colten G. Tholen Caleb A. Laisure Louanna S. Cronin Jennifer J. Moe John B. Gabruch Bonita J. Steele Tyson J. Mackin Ethaniel G. Bennett

1991 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2016 2016 2017

J. Stein W. Paplawski P. Carlson C. Gray W. Bowles R. Allemand R. Schaal H. Grounds K. Wiebe P. Dalrymple

Steven V. Moon Jeff M. Slabik Derek R. Petrie Ryan G. Coons Brian J. Bain Michelle K. Wiebe Kevin E. Presley Spencer K. Cave Picked Up Joseph M. Sanders Robert C. Rhoades III Joseph A. Dietrich Brian A. Potts Leo H. Goss Zachary M. Brown Douglas A. Gardner Shawn L. Dugle II Bruce H. Hansen Walter J. Valdez Daniel J. Sobieski Frank S. Noska IV Todd J. Southam Richard F. Rowley Elizabeth A. Carter

2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2005 2017 2015 2016 2017 2017 2017 2017 2016 2017 2017 2017 2018 2017 2017 2017

D. Nielsen J. Clary J. Patrick M. Golightly G. Childers R. MacDonald A. England E. Johnson R. Nelson E. Stanosheck M. Moline M. Zieser B. Johnston G. Mefford J. Mason A. Hayes M. Moline S. Zirbel C. Gray C. Gray C. Brent H. Wilson T. Sanders R. Black

TOP TO BOTTOM:

This non-typical mule deer, scoring 262-6/8 points, was taken by B&C Associate Barry D. Miller while on a hunt near the South Saskatchewan River, Saskatchewan, in 2017. In 2017, B&C Associate Ricky W. Brule harvested this 161-7/8-point typical whitetail deer while on an archery hunt in Dakota County, Minnesota. Catherine L. DeBlasio took this typical Coues’ whitetail, scoring 104-1/8 points, in 2018 while on a hunt in Sonora, Mexico.

NON-TYPICAL MULE DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 355-2/8 262 6/8 271 1/8 245 3/8 251 3/8 243 4/8 251 2/8 241 7/8 245 6/8 234 2/8 237 232 4/8 237 6/8 231 1/8 235 6/8 230 4/8 241 7/8 230 2/8 235 5/8 228 1/8 238 2/8 228 1/8 229 7/8 223 1/8 228 4/8 222 225 6/8 220 7/8 224 5/8 220 6/8 227 5/8 220 1/8 229 1/8

South Barry D. Miller 2017 Saskatchewan River, SK South Robert L. Heisler 2017 Saskatchewan River, SK Great Sand Hills, SK Steve Ackerman 2017 Wallowa Co., OR Henry W.B. Daggett 1919 South Brendon A. Ehrhardt 2017 Saskatchewan River, SK Weld Co., CO Ricky M. Schaffer 2017 Adams Co., ID Orvil D. Swarts 1970 Saguache Co., CO Steven M. Frost 2017 Las Animas Co., CO Matthew C. Kissinger 2017 Elko Co., NV Steven R. Boyce 2011 Moffat Co., CO John B. Allred 2016 Grand Forks, BC Dennis Siemens 1975 Yakima Co., WA Jake D. Fife 2017 Park Co., WY Bret K. Williams 2017 Lake Russell W. Long 2017 Diefenbaker, SK Unknown Unknown 2003

J. Clary A. Hill B. Seidle D. Morris A. Hill W. Ogden R. Hatfield D. Birdsall M. Miller L. Clark S. Davis R. Berreth S. Wilkins B. Garcarz A. Long R. Naizer

TYPICAL COLUMBIA BLACKTAIL DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 182-2/8 139 5/8 148 4/8 Siskiyou Co., CA Weston S. Arvin 135 3/8 158 3/8 Island Co., WA Brandon L. Stroup 127 3/8 144 7/8 Snohomish Co., WA William R. Maas

1994 A. Adams 2017 D. Sanford 2017 R. Spaulding

TYPICAL SITKA BLACKTAIL DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 133 108 1/8 116 6/8 Kodiak Island, AK 102 104 1/8 Kodiak Island, AK

Samuel H. Lungren John N. Zell, Jr.

2016 E. Headley 2017 S. Kleinsmith

WHITETAIL DEER FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 213-5/8 198 6/8 232 North Saskatchewan Christie W. De Villiers 2017 B. Mitchell River, SK 192 7/8 202 5/8 Livingston Co., IL William Brockman 1976 D. Boland

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 83

TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER CONTINUED

TOP TO BOTTOM:

James D. Shircliff took this typical whitetail deer, scoring 182-1/8 points, in 2017 while on a hunt in Otter Tail County, Minnesota. He was shooting a .300 Winchester Mag. This non-typical whitetail deer, scoring 204-2/8 points, was taken by Wesley D. McDowell in Jay County, Indiana, in 2017. In 2018 while on a hunt in Sonora, Mexico, B&C Associate Justin D. Bates harvested this non-typical Couesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; whitetail, scoring 141-2/8 points.

84 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

189 1/8 191 4/8 187 2/8 198 6/8 183 5/8 201 182 6/8 189 6/8 182 6/8 187 6/8 182 1/8 186 7/8 180 5/8 192 7/8 179 1/8 181 7/8 178 183 2/8 177 6/8 192 177 5/8 202 3/8 176 6/8 182 4/8 176 5/8 179 5/8 176 5/8 188 7/8 176 186 5/8 175 7/8 187 3/8 175 5/8 187 6/8 175 3/8 192 6/8 175 2/8 179 2/8 175 1/8 186 5/8 174 7/8 179 3/8 174 7/8 203 4/8 174 6/8 178 4/8 174 6/8 183 4/8 174 5/8 191 5/8 174 2/8 176 4/8 174 188 3/8 173 4/8 180 5/8 172 7/8 180 4/8 172 7/8 182 6/8 172 5/8 180 3/8 172 5/8 175 4/8 172 3/8 177 1/8 172 1/8 175 172 182 2/8 172 176 171 7/8 181 6/8 171 6/8 177 1/8 171 6/8 178 4/8 171 5/8 174 171 4/8 177 2/8 171 3/8 191 3/8 171 2/8 181 3/8 171 2/8 182 6/8 171 1/8 180 4/8 171 1/8 175 7/8 171 1/8 181 1/8 170 6/8 182 4/8 170 6/8 173 5/8 170 6/8 188 3/8 170 6/8 185 1/8 170 4/8 176 5/8 170 4/8 171 6/8 170 3/8 187 7/8 170 2/8 176 2/8 170 2/8 193 5/8 170 196 2/8 170 178 6/8 170 175 5/8 170 178 6/8 170 180 5/8 170 173 169 7/8 182 169 6/8 174 3/8 169 4/8 177 1/8 169 4/8 175 6/8 169 176 2/8 169 174 168 6/8 182 168 6/8 182 5/8 168 5/8 184 5/8 168 5/8 176 5/8

Jackson Co., IA Jeffrey R. Palmer 2016 Jennings Co., IN Kacee D. Sorenson 2017 Hamilton Co., OH Nicholas E. Dirr 2016 Ozaukee Co., WI Picked Up 2017 York Co., ME Eugene A. Doughty 2017 Otter Tail Co., MN James D. Shircliff 2017 Putnam Co., MO Richard E. Allen 2017 St. Charles Co., MO Samuel L. Keeven 2017 McKenzie Co., ND Dustin N. Gjestvang 2017 Dimmit Co., TX Mark W. Malone 2017 South Saskatchewan Parry R. Boyko 2017 River, SK Van Buren Co., IA David B. Vandenberg 2016 Greenwood Co., KS J. Michael Guyton, Jr. 2017 Vigo Co., IN Shawn D. Paulin 2017 Mercer Co., IL Michael D. Austin 2017 Seagram Lakes, SK Daniel A. Biondo 2017 Winneshiek Co., IA Greg M. Lewey 2017 Logan Co., WV Jessie L. Hatfield 2017 Defiance Co., OH Rick L. Jesse 2017 Crawford Co., WI Heather M. Alexander 2016 Franklin Co., IN Cameron M. Masters 2017 Scotland Co., MO Craig D. Brown 2017 Des Moines Co., IA Cody M. Belknap 2017 Douglas Co., MN Douglas J. Tvrdik 1984 Breckinridge Co., KY Picked Up 2017 Jackson Co., WI Brandon J. Gottsacker 2017 Tallahatchie Co., MS Healy S. Vise 2018 Vermilion River, AB Bryan E. Stewart 2017 Coffey Co., KS James R. Matt 2016 Stearns Co., MN Jeremy J. Sivula 2017 Richland Co., OH Paul Boggs 2017 Vernon Co., WI Damian L. Weiland 2017 Grant Co., WI April M. Laufenberg 2017 Last Mountain Justin J. Lipp 2017 Lake, SK Lawrence Co., OH Scott D. Wilds 2017 Motherwell Michael S. Glover 2017 Reservoir, SK Cheyenne Co., CO G. Scott Jones 2017 Delaware Co., IN Jason A. Breedlove 2017 Ringgold Co., IA Richard L. Labbe 2010 Comanche Co., KS Robert G. Spencer 2016 Pike Co., IL Gregg A. Laverick 2011 Todd Co., MN Mary A. Ostrowski 2017 Eau Claire Co., WI Tammy L. Tambornino 2018 Marshall Co., KY Joseph L. Skees, Jr. 2017 Dubois Co., IN Ryan S. Hilsmeyer 2016 Marathon Co., WI Preston R. Jehn 2017 Saunderson Ryan R. Cowper 2012 Lake, NB Dane Co., WI Ronald J. Cotter 2017 Edmonson Co., KY Mary Hood 2017 Scotland Co., MO Anthony P. Bishop 2017 Zavala Co., TX Alberto Bailleres 2017 Fayette Co., WV James W. Criss 2017 Webb Co., TX Timothy J. Bienski 2016 Darke Co., OH Franklin D. Fritz 2017 Desha Co., AR Brent S. Hanks 2017 Harrison Co., IA Paul C. Van Donge 2017 Grundy Co., IL Joshua T. Slattery 2017 Jay Co., IN Lee W. Huelskamp 2017 Monroe Co., MI Christopher J. Fischer 2017 Missouri Unknown 1990 Ross Co., OH Christian J. Seymour 2017 Warren Co., IA Bruce L. Hupke 2018 Lee Co., IL Charles L. Urbasek 2017 Johnson Co., TN Sara E. Roark 2018 Jo Daviess Co., IL Corbin M. Townsend 2016 Tom Green Co., TX Richard L. Block 2017 Mercer Co., OH Michael J. Hoying 2017 Otoe Co., NE Matthew K. Ohs 2017 Crawford Co., WI Daniel B. Kessenich 2016 Todd Co., MN Paul D. Wettstein 2016 Northampton Donald L. Ryan, Jr. 2017 Co., PA Red Lake Co., MN Austin D. Bohm 2012

K. Fredrickson S. Petkovich M. Serio P. Barwick H. Libby T. Kalsbeck J. Ream S. Corley B. Zundel J. Newport D. Pezderic J. Brummer C. Newland M. Verble M. Staser A. England A. Crum G. Surber S. Swihart B. Laufenberg R. Graber J. Ream D. Pfeiffer T. Kalsbeck D. Weddle S. Godfrey C. Neill W. Paplawski T. Dunkin R. Rocheleau A. Cramer D. Boland A. Crum P. Mckenzie G. Trent J. Clary C. Neill J. Bogucki A. Wentworth G. Moore K. Zimmerman M. Harrison J. Lunde D. Weddle S. Petkovich T. Heil W. Hanson A. Crum W. Cooper S. Corley J. Stein T. Dowdy M. Ledbetter R. Wood C. Latham K. Fredrickson R. Rae R. Wood B. Nash D. Boland D. Haynes K. Freymiller N. Davey D. Ray B. Laufenberg R. Henicke R. Wood D. Boland A. Crum J. Olson D. Lynch S. Grabow

TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER CONTINUED 168 5/8 175 7/8 Scott Co., IN Ron L. Weir 2017 168 3/8 173 7/8 Marathon Co., WI Zachary A. Burris 2017 168 2/8 182 4/8 Russell Co., KY Mark S. Bloyd 2017 168 187 1/8 Greenup Co., KY Lonzo Horsley 2017 168 170 4/8 Rock Co., WI Robert J. Leidholdt 2017 167 5/8 171 5/8 Tuscarawas Co., OH William L. Leonard 2017 167 4/8 179 3/8 Dimmit Co., TX Casey D. Cundieff 2017 167 3/8 175 3/8 Conway Co., AR Kerry L. Sharp 2017 167 2/8 177 1/8 Maverick Co., TX Steve E. Holloway 2017 167 169 4/8 Baxter Co., AR Richard W. Skaggs 2017 167 171 4/8 Tippecanoe Co., IN Jason L. Dombkowski 2017 166 6/8 175 7/8 Rush Co., IN Kelsey L. McGinnis 2017 166 5/8 172 5/8 Hancock Co., OH Thomas M. Young 2017 166 5/8 176 7/8 Rock Co., WI Russell B. Carroll 2016 166 4/8 183 1/8 Meade Co., KY Tyler E. Stull 2017 166 2/8 181 3/8 Osage Co., MO Anna R. Massman 2017 166 2/8 173 3/8 Wayne Co., IN Hunter D. Shelton 2017 165 7/8 202 2/8 Marion Co., KY Robert A. 2017 Morgeson, Jr. 165 7/8 179 7/8 Meade Co., KY Ronald K. Hicks 2017 165 6/8 172 2/8 Venango Co., PA Mark A. Germock 2017 165 5/8 168 6/8 Louisa Co., IA David E. Boysen 2017 165 4/8 184 1/8 Barren Co., KY Timothy D. Mosby 2017 165 4/8 173 2/8 Yancey Co., NC Michael A. Whitson 2017 165 3/8 175 7/8 Sullivan Co., IN Andrew M. Ford 2017 165 2/8 171 6/8 Waupaca Co., WI James R. Williams 2015 165 168 3/8 Jackson Co., WI David M. West 2005 165 172 Tunica Co., MS Garland J.F. Melton 2017 164 7/8 168 6/8 Kenton Co., KY Jason D. Sebastian 2017 164 7/8 166 5/8 Kleberg Co., TX William N. Glasgow 2018 164 7/8 170 4/8 Marathon Co., WI Nicholas B. Weigel 2018 164 5/8 183 Adair Co., KY Steve W. Smith 2017 164 4/8 167 7/8 Grant Co., WI Greg M. Carl 2017 164 3/8 180 Windy Lake, SK Johnnie M. Wilson III 2017 164 2/8 168 2/8 Washburn Co., WI Brian R. Melton 2017 164 1/8 172 Gentry Co., MO Nicholas J. Burr 2017 164 1/8 177 1/8 Muskingum Co., OH Jodie T. Ashton 2017 164 169 6/8 Breckinridge Co., KY Hunter L. Shrewsberry 2017 164 183 4/8 Crawford Co., IN Marvin M. Baker II 2016 163 7/8 171 1/8 Clermont Co., OH Gregory S. Paytes 2017 163 7/8 183 2/8 Franklin Co., OH Stephen E. Esker 2017 163 7/8 167 5/8 Greer Co., OK Baylee W. Trench 2017 163 7/8 192 Lincoln Co., NE James A. Jacob 2017 163 7/8 177 7/8 Rockingham Co., VA Robert L. Black 1980 163 6/8 169 2/8 Chisago Co., MN Marlin Houfer 1980 163 5/8 175 3/8 Grayson Co., KY Jason K. Tubb 2017 163 4/8 168 6/8 Mille Lacs Co., MN Joseph A. Pearson 2017 163 4/8 170 3/8 Scioto Co., OH Scott M. Hindenlang 2017 163 4/8 176 Vernon Co., WI Todd T. Swiggum 2017 163 3/8 173 6/8 Columbia Co., WI Craig R. Stevens 2017 163 2/8 173 3/8 Waukesha Co., WI Cory R. Voss 2017 163 1/8 167 5/8 Grayson Co., KY S. Scott Hart 2011 163 1/8 176 2/8 Grayson Co., TX Charles R. Heitzman 2017 163 1/8 165 2/8 Smoky Lake, AB Daniel J. Thomson 2017 163 1/8 173 4/8 Winnebago Co., WI Craig T. Marx 2005 163 1/8 168 2/8 Woodford Co., KY Andrew T. Burns 2017 163 169 7/8 Raleigh Co., WV Jeffrey L. Toney 2017 162 7/8 189 3/8 Chippewa Co., WI Keith A. LeVick 2017 162 7/8 178 5/8 Chippewa Co., WI Travis C. Culver 2010 162 6/8 165 2/8 Bennington Co., VT Picked Up 2012 162 6/8 167 4/8 Mercer Co., PA Raymond P. Kenney III 2017 162 6/8 179 Winnebago Co., WI John L. Ernst 2017 162 5/8 173 7/8 Arkansas Co., AR Steven L. Henderson 2017 162 5/8 175 3/8 Maverick Co., TX David P. Bernard 2014 162 4/8 172 6/8 Le Sueur Co., MN Brady D. Hiller 2017 162 3/8 165 2/8 Clinton Co., OH Kevin R. Garen 2016 162 3/8 168 5/8 Warren Co., IA James P. Edenburn 2017 162 2/8 177 2/8 Goodhue Co., MN Jason A. Nesseth 2017 162 166 7/8 Cecil Co., MD Elmer P. Weaver IV 2017 162 170 5/8 Christian Co., KY Greg Abner 2017 162 174 3/8 Jefferson Co., WI Thomas D. Wilson 2017 162 166 St. Croix Co., WI Jacob L. Ostendorf 2017 162 169 6/8 St. Francis Co., AR Glenn A. Dickson, Jr. 2017 161 7/8 179 Dakota Co., MN Ricky W. Brule 2017 161 7/8 180 3/8 Haskell Co., TX Trevor D. Rees-Jones 2014 161 7/8 174 4/8 Jackson Co., MI Brian K. Alrich 2017 161 7/8 166 3/8 Porter Co., IN Thomas C. Jordan 2017

TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER CONTINUED M. Verble P. Jensen D. Weddle G. Surber S. Zirbel R. Richman J. Tkac D. Doughty J. Stein J. Harmon R. Graber S. Petkovich W. Ogden B. Ihlenfeldt D. Weddle L. Lueckenhoff R. Graber R. Estes T. Smith M. Weinzen C. Coburn W. Cooper D. Boland R. Graber S. Zirbel B. Laufenberg T. Baine J. Phillips N. Ballard P. Jensen D. Weddle A. Crum W. Cooper K. Zimmerman J. Blystone R. Huffman T. Smith M. Verble J. Wood R. Deis E. Parry R. Case B. Trumbo J. Lunde K. Morphew D. Ohman G. Trent G. Wegner J. Lunde G. Wegner K. Morphew T. Bartoskewitz W. Paplawski M. Miller K. Ison G. Foster J. Lunde J. Lunde C. Smiley A. Brunst M. Miller B. Sanford H. Monsour C. Cordes D. Haynes K. Freymiller J. Olson G. Wagner W. Cooper J. Hjort J. Lunde B. Sanford J. Lunde M. Bartoskewitz J. Knevel J. Bogucki

161 5/8 173 3/8 Little River Co., AR 161 3/8 172 2/8 Hopkins Co., KY 161 3/8 170 Howard Co., MO 161 3/8 170 3/8 McHenry Co., ND 161 3/8 172 1/8 Quitman Co., MS 161 2/8 171 Highland Co., OH 161 1/8 187 5/8 Butler Co., OH 161 1/8 166 7/8 Fillmore Co., MN 161 177 3/8 Putnam Co., IN 161 171 5/8 Shawano Co., WI 160 6/8 164 7/8 Boundary Co., ID 160 6/8 170 2/8 Buffalo Co., WI 160 6/8 170 4/8 Middlesex Co., MA 160 5/8 173 6/8 Aroostook Co., ME 160 5/8 163 5/8 Beaver Co., PA 160 5/8 163 5/8 Gallatin Co., KY 160 5/8 180 6/8 LaPorte Co., IN 160 4/8 173 5/8 Chippewa Co., WI 160 4/8 167 5/8 Wilcox Co., GA 160 3/8 165 2/8 Clark Co., OH 160 3/8 184 6/8 Dickinson Co., KS 160 3/8 162 3/8 Jefferson Co., WI 160 3/8 165 4/8 Lawrence Co., IN 160 3/8 167 Marshall Co., WV 160 3/8 166 3/8 Otter Tail Co., MN 160 2/8 166 6/8 Harrison Co., KY 160 177 4/8 Morgan Co., OH 160 163 6/8 Sawyer Co., WI

Jimmy C. Davis 2017 Dylan R. Ladd 2017 Charles R. Basye 2017 Jeremy D. Flom 2017 Chris D. Talley 2017 David E. Hiehle, Jr. 2017 Michael A. McIntosh 2017 Jeffrey A. Lien 2017 Douglas A. Spencer 2017 Matthew W. Serwa 2017 Timothy A. Huff 2017 Brandon J. Gottsacker 2016 Steven J. Robinson 2016 Jamie J. Guimond 2017 Thomas P. 2017 Weidinger, Jr. Ronald A. Grant 2017 Tyler S. Hardesty 2017 Kenneth Turner 1954 Matthew Stubbs 2017 Zakkery L. Acles 2016 William G. 2017 McKinley, Jr. Timothy E. Reel 2017 Jason D. Brown 2016 Shelden C. Burkle 2017 Wayne L. Claassen 2017 Chris Denniston 2017 David S. Hackathorn 2017 Dean S. Michels 2017

D. Doughty D. Weddle J. Demand J. Plesuk W. Walters G. Trent R. Wood D. Boland G. Howard T. Heil K. Vaughn S. Godfrey J. Brown T. Montgomery J. Medeiros J. Lacefield J. Bogucki J. Lunde W. Cooper T. Schlater C. Curtis J. Lunde M. Verble W. Johnson T. Kalsbeck W. Cooper R. Huffman J. Lunde

NON-TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER - WORLDâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S RECORD SCORE 333-7/8 274 5/8 296 2/8 Fairfield Co., OH Daniel S. Coffman 2015 246 5/8 257 3/8 Zavala Co., TX Alberto Bailleres 2017 245 7/8 262 2/8 Barron Co., WI Jerry E. Nykanen 1962 242 6/8 253 4/8 Dallas Co., IA Nicholaus R. Petersen 2017 230 2/8 241 7/8 Clay Co., IL Adam L. Cartright 2017 228 5/8 232 6/8 Fayette Co., IA Timothy A. Nuss 2017 227 6/8 236 1/8 Macon Co., MO Jeremy J. Luecke 2017 226 7/8 231 5/8 Saline Co., KS Rhett W. Butler 2017 225 1/8 236 1/8 Grayson Co., TX Mark S. Svane 2018 224 2/8 230 4/8 La Salle Co., TX Travis A. Hunter 2017 217 2/8 221 7/8 Clay Co., MO Phillip A. Bradshaw 2017 216 3/8 224 5/8 Chautauqua Co., KS Ramon Criss 1988 216 1/8 219 2/8 Morgan Co., IN Chad A. Robards 2016 215 7/8 223 7/8 Brown Co., MN Barry P. Thompson 2017 213 7/8 222 5/8 Clark Co., OH Jeff E. Leach 2017 213 4/8 226 1/8 Phillips Co., KS Garrett R. Wickham 2017 213 1/8 219 4/8 Ballard Co., KY Jesse H. Anderson 2017 212 7/8 218 5/8 Harrison Co., KY George P. Hehr 2017 212 6/8 220 Chippewa Co., MN Dale Mann 1960 212 5/8 227 3/8 Monroe Co., MO Frank Lemongelli 2017 212 215 6/8 McCurtain Co., OK Stevie D. Morgan 2017 211 7/8 220 3/8 Jasper Co., IN Anthony J. Soto 2017 211 1/8 226 7/8 Concho Co., TX Bruce E. Vrana 2017 211 1/8 220 6/8 Logan Co., KY Michael D. Forrest 2017 210 7/8 213 5/8 Knox Co., IL Ray E. Grohmann 2017 209 7/8 221 1/8 Belmont Co., OH Luke M. Lohan 2017 209 1/8 217 2/8 Hughes Co., SD Thad M. Bauer 2017 208 3/8 220 7/8 Fairfield Co., OH James P. Stephenson 2017 208 3/8 222 2/8 Greene Co., IN Dennis E. Sutton 2017 207 7/8 209 2/8 La Salle Co., TX Jacqueline A. Hunter 2017 207 4/8 215 1/8 Johnson Co., KS Clayton A. Coyle 2017 206 6/8 208 Seminole Co., OK Daniel W. Kyle 2017 206 4/8 211 2/8 Dallas Co., MO Levi C. Hart 2017 206 4/8 211 7/8 Otter Tail Co., MN Joao A. Lima 2017 205 6/8 214 1/8 Adams Co., OH Nicholas D. 2017 Shoemaker 205 6/8 221 5/8 St. Charles Co., MO Gregory W. Jennings 2017 204 7/8 211 7/8 Marion Co., OH John E. Boblenz 2017 204 5/8 211 1/8 Winona Co., MN Stephen J. LaValla 2017 204 4/8 209 Sturgeon River, AB Jeremy J. Prinsen 2017 204 2/8 214 6/8 Jay Co., IN Wesley D. McDowell 2017 203 1/8 207 3/8 Newton Co., IN Eugene A. Braun 2017 203 1/8 206 3/8 Chip Lake, AB Brian G. Meads, Jr. 2017 202 7/8 211 Adams Co., OH Michael L. Murtland 2017

W. Ogden J. Stein S. Ashley R. McPherren D. Good C. Pierce J. Blystone J. Harmon E. Stanosheck J. Shipman P. Lowry R. Hale R. Graber C. Pierce R. Wood B. Odle D. Weddle J. Phillips S. Grabow R. Garver G. Moore R. Graber B. Carroll D. Weddle T. Walmsley R. Huffman M. Clausen R. Wood J. Bogucki J. Shipman R. Bergloff G. Moore J. Blystone M. Harrison R. Wood S. Corley S. Swihart D. Boland W. Voogd J. Bogucki J. Bogucki W. Voogd R. Wood

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 85

NON-TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER CONTINUED

TOP TO BOTTOM:

Israel P. Payton took this Alaska-Yukon moose, scoring 258-2/8 points, in 2017 while on a hunt in the Alaska Range, Alaska. This Shiras’ moose, scoring 151-3/8 points, was taken by B&C Associate Camille L. Miller in Bonneville County, Idaho, in 2017. She was shooting a .270 Winchester Mag. In 2017 while on a hunt in the Mackenzie Mountains, Northwest Territories, B&C Associate and Official Measurer Mark J. Clausen harvested this mountain caribou, scoring 392-6/8 points.

86 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

202 5/8 210 2/8 Brown Co., OH Justin A. Miller 2017 D. Bastow 202 4/8 208 2/8 Owen Co., IN David M. Greenwood 2017 S. Petkovich 202 3/8 207 5/8 Marquette Co., WI Michael D. Pokey, Jr. 2017 M. Miller 202 1/8 216 6/8 Gasconade Co., MO Christopher J. Lenauer 2017 L. Redel 202 215 7/8 Bonnie Lake, AB Bill D. Chitwood 2017 D. Hart 202 206 4/8 Peace River, AB Calvin J. Ireland 2017 D. Powell 201 3/8 213 7/8 Marshall Co., KS Chad R. Kolar 2017 K. Witt 201 2/8 207 5/8 Callaway Co., MO Picked Up 2001 J. Baker 201 2/8 209 6/8 McCreary Co., KY Picked Up 2018 D. Weddle 200 7/8 206 3/8 Lake Manitoba, MB Wayne D. Peterson 2017 V. Crichton 200 7/8 209 6/8 Ross Co., OH Peter M. Shaw 2018 R. Wood 200 6/8 206 7/8 Tyler Co., WV Richard L. King 2017 D. Boland 199 3/8 210 3/8 Lorain Co., OH Raquel M. Dominico 2017 A. Cramer 199 1/8 205 2/8 Brown Co., OH Daniel C. Durbin 2016 R. Wood 198 5/8 206 5/8 Clay Co., KS Nathaniel D. Robinson 2017 M. Poteet 198 5/8 209 5/8 Pottawatomie Matthew J. Willis 2017 G. Moore Co., OK 198 2/8 215 4/8 Holt Co., MO Christopher J. 2017 R. Krueger Woodman 198 1/8 212 4/8 Clarion Co., PA Michael D. Buzard 2017 R. D’Angelo 197 5/8 206 4/8 Milam Co., TX Gregory M. Perry 2017 B. Martin 197 2/8 202 6/8 Bullitt Co., KY Robert J. Wimsatt 2017 R. Graber 197 203 Suffern Lake, SK Patrick D. McKinnon 2017 C. Dillabough 196 5/8 199 4/8 North Kent Tomlinson 2017 B. Seidle Saskatchewan River, SK 196 4/8 203 2/8 Kalamazoo Co., MI Kevin D. Kelley 2017 B. Hagy 196 4/8 204 2/8 Richland Co., WI Nathan T. 2017 S. Zirbel VanDynHoven 196 3/8 204 2/8 Burnett Co., WI Gregory Q. Widiker 2017 K. Zimmerman 196 204 2/8 Harrison Co., IN Jason A. Noble 2017 M. Verble 196 201 3/8 Kleberg Co., TX Joseph B. Richter, Jr. 2017 S. Fuchs 196 203 7/8 Warren Co., IA Tyler A. Till 2018 T. Kalsbeck 195 7/8 202 7/8 Morgan Co., MO Wayne E. Wingard 2017 R. Karczewski 195 5/8 215 3/8 Audrain Co., MO John T. Lummis 2017 D. Hollingsworth 195 5/8 203 3/8 Juneau Co., WI Aaron M. Volk 2015 J. Lunde 195 201 6/8 Boone Co., IA Dennis G. Miller 2016 K. Fredrickson 195 201 1/8 Lafayette Co., AR James A. Kitchens 2017 D. Doughty 194 2/8 205 7/8 McLean Co., KY Andy Hudson 2017 W. Cooper 194 199 Cottle Co., TX Molly G. Maples 2017 D. Wright 193 4/8 199 5/8 Carter Co., OK S. Mark Marion 2017 G. Moore 193 3/8 202 5/8 Trinity Co., TX Judith C. Burnaman 2017 B. Martin 193 1/8 198 Jackson Co., OH Scott G. Arnold 2017 A. Cramer 191 7/8 196 Bullitt Co., KY Jason W. Harl, Sr. 2014 S. Petkovich 191 6/8 195 1/8 Houston Co., TX Hunter C. Lolley 2017 B. Martin 191 5/8 197 2/8 Preble Co., OH Raymond K. Lipps 2017 R. Wood 191 4/8 194 3/8 Putnam Co., IN Ryan B. Lemley 2017 G. Howard 190 7/8 198 5/8 Cedar Co., IA Steven C. Ihns 2017 R. Bergloff 190 6/8 196 1/8 Stearns Co., MN Allison R. Caird 2017 S. Grabow 190 2/8 209 Hughes Co., OK Justin E. Meester 2017 E. Stanosheck 190 2/8 196 6/8 Marathon Co., WI Andrew A. Mlodik 2017 T. Heil 190 1/8 200 7/8 Shiawassee Co., MI Mark S. Dalley 2017 B. Hagy 190 1/8 196 1/8 Wayne Co., IA Chad A. Vandercook 2017 M. LaRose 189 4/8 198 O’Brien Co., IA Will R. Friedrichsen 2017 J. Brummer 189 3/8 196 6/8 Randolph Co., WV Bryan A. Farley 2017 E. Richmond 188 5/8 194 7/8 Madison Co., IN Matthew A. Barnett 2017 S. Petkovich 188 3/8 200 7/8 Monroe Co., IN David J. Ennis 2017 M. Verble 187 5/8 196 3/8 Blue Earth Co., MN Daniel R. Fischer 2017 J. Lunde 187 4/8 203 2/8 Goodhue Co., MN Bradley R. Carpenter 2017 J. Lunde 187 4/8 191 2/8 Lucas Co., IA Jared A. Sasnett 2017 R. Norville 187 3/8 192 7/8 Tioga Co., PA John W. Pendergast 2017 R. Kingsley 186 6/8 199 Jefferson Co., IN Michael A. Hunt 2017 S. Petkovich 186 6/8 198 7/8 Rock Co., WI Tom A. Keller 2017 P. Barwick 186 5/8 195 Vanderburgh Co., IN Michael J. Ritter 2017 J. Bogucki 186 5/8 192 4/8 Warren Co., IA Bernard J. Christen 2017 K. Freymiller 186 4/8 201 Ohio Co., KY Brent O.D. Phelps 2017 K. Morphew 186 194 1/8 Caldwell Co., MO Blake M. Kramer 2005 J. Martin 186 194 7/8 Jefferson Co., KY Robert C. Rogers III 2017 D. Weddle 185 7/8 192 5/8 Lonoke Co., AR Matthew C. Kelly 2017 D. Doughty 185 6/8 193 6/8 Fulton Co., IL Timothy J. Hahn 2017 R. Kingsley 185 6/8 188 2/8 Lancaster Co., NE Philip N. Knudson 2014 R. Stutheit 185 1/8 191 1/8 Jo Daviess Co., IL Picked Up 2018 A. Crum 185 189 4/8 Ohio Co., KY Michael E. Austin 2017 C. Harden

TYPICAL COUES’ WHITETAIL - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 144-1/8 127 131 3/8 Yavapai Co., AZ 121 2/8 126 Maricopa Co., AZ

Joseph A. Dietrich 2017 M. Zieser Matthew D. Liljenquist 2018 M. Zieser

TYPICAL COUES’ WHITETAIL CONTINUED 118 3/8 127 Sonora, MX 113 4/8 118 4/8 Graham Co., AZ 108 5/8 111 5/8 Sonora, MX 106 4/8 112 2/8 Sonora, MX 104 1/8 107 7/8 Sonora, MX 102 2/8 105 Pima Co., AZ 101 4/8 108 3/8 Graham Co., AZ 101 4/8 103 Sonora, MX

Juan Manuel 2016 Posada Falomir John Holcomb 2017 Frank S. Noska IV 2018 Mark D. Farnam 2018 Catherine L. DeBlasio 2018 Robert W. Spinks 2017 Sonya T. Keetch 2017 Frank Hernandez, Jr. 2018

E. Barrett Mena D. May C. Brent J. Zins R. Addison R. Ratz R. Stayner D. Perrien

NON-TYPICAL COUES’ WHITETAIL - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 196 2/8 141 2/8 120 1/8 116 6/8 113 4/8

146 124 124 7/8 116 7/8

Sonora, MX Greenlee Co., AZ Graham Co., AZ Sierra Co., NM

Justin D. Bates Picked Up Scott Keetch Jerome C. Garcia

2018 2018 2017 2015

D. Nielsen R. Stayner R. Stayner N. Lawson

MOOSE AND CARIBOU FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

CANADA MOOSE - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 242 220 5/8 228 4/8 Klinkit Lake, BC Michael A. Pierce 2017 D. Eider 212 6/8 218 5/8 Cassiar Mts., BC Paul M. Dickson, Jr. 2017 J. Capurro 204 4/8 209 5/8 Jennings River, BC Marcus R. Sullivan 2017 D. Eider 196 3/8 197 6/8 Nahlin River, BC Luciano Dalla Lana 2017 L. Hill 193 7/8 198 4/8 Buckley Lake, BC Frederick E. Hilger 2017 S. Ashley 190 6/8 196 3/8 Aroostook Co., ME Ethan L. Cooley 2017 T. Montgomery 189 5/8 196 2/8 Blackfish Lake, MB Kyle H. Harmon 2017 E. Parker 189 1/8 201 Oxford Co., ME Chad S. Morse 2017 J. Arsenault 186 4/8 193 5/8 Snipe Lake, AB Mohamad Rakie 2017 J. Shapka 186 189 1/8 Hudson Bay, SK Blake D. Dixon 2017 C. Dietz 185 2/8 187 4/8 Madawaska Glen Baker 2017 R. Groleau River, NB

ALASKA-YUKON MOOSE - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 266-4/8 258 2/8 269 1/8 228 3/8 236 6/8 224 1/8 232 2/8 220 4/8 233 7/8 215 1/8 219 4/8 214 1/8 220 7/8 213 6/8 219 7/8 213 2/8 213 5/8 211 6/8 222 6/8

Alaska Range, AK Yukon River, AK Mucha Lake, AK Andreafsky River, AK Yukon River, AK Kokwok River, AK Yukon River, AK Nabesna River, AK Ogilvie Mts., YT

Israel P. Payton Calvin A. Speckman Tanner J. Wilson Craig A. Alberg

2017 2017 2017 2016

Ross Q. Meyer 2017 Joseph J. Hanes 2017 Danny J. Stotler 2016 Chad M. Becker 2017 Christopher T. Maxwell 2017

C. Brent S. Kleinsmith K. Zimmerman J. Brummer J. Ramsey T. Spraker K. Travnicek C. Collins D. Skinner

SHIRAS’ MOOSE - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 205-4/8 174 169 2/8 168 6/8 164 6/8 162 157 2/8 155 6/8 151 4/8 151 3/8 148 2/8 147 146 143 1/8 140 6/8

181 171 2/8 183 6/8 168 6/8 168 7/8 162 6/8 161 3/8 155 167 4/8 152 151 4/8 148 145 1/8 143

Albany Co., WY Shoshone Co., ID Flathead Co., MT Salt Lake Co., UT Jefferson Co., MT Weber Co., UT Boulder Co., CO Uinta Co., WY Bonneville Co., ID Cache Co., UT Stevens Co., WA Mineral Co., CO Washakie Co., WY Grand Co., CO

Jason J. Bruckner 2017 H. Louis Feltmann 2015 Patrick A. Van Eimeren 2017 Hadley L. Spivey 2017 Roger F. Henschel 2017 Craig J. Kohler 2016 Eric D. Lowery 2017 Keldon A. Paxman 2017 Camille L. Miller 2017 Gordon W. Krogwold 2017 Keley D. Dormaier 2016 Billy J. Ruble 2017 Kirk F. Kaufmann 2017 Richard L. Smith 2016

E. Boley P. Gardner O. Opre D. Nielsen J. Pallister R. Hall B. Davies D. Nielsen R. Atwood T. Heil S. Wilkins R. Black T. Donnelly J. Legnard

MOUNTAIN CARIBOU - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 459-3/8 416 6/8 430 6/8 Quiet Lake, YT Robert W. Spinks 395 403 4/8 Mabel Lake, BC Unknown 392 6/8 412 2/8 Mackenzie Mts., NT Mark J. Clausen

2016 R. Ratz 1976 G. Villnow 2017 G. English

WOODLAND CARIBOU - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 419-5/8 361 4/8 379 6/8 Port Blandford, NL Louis W. Breland 308 3/8 313 4/8 Deer Lake, NL Denise A. Hoffman 287 1/8 298 4/8 Cormack Lake, NL Timothy J. Skelly

2016 D. Doughty 2017 J. Borlang 2014 J. Olson

TOP TO BOTTOM:

B&C Associate Scott A. Cooper took this Quebec-Labrador caribou, scoring 379-7/8 points, in 2017 while hunting near Lac Bienville, Quebec. He was shooting a .280 Remington. This bison, scoring 115 points, was taken by Jay H. Stanford on a hunt near Copper River, Alaska, in 2018. Bryan S. Hancock took this Rocky Mountain goat, scoring 47-4/8 points, in 2017 while hunting in Bonneville County, Idaho.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 87

BARREN GROUND CARIBOU - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 477 391 4/8 404 5/8 Fourteenmile Lake, AK 384 3/8 425 5/8 Styx River, AK

Cody T. Terrell

2017 R. Deis

Joe W. Davies

2017 S. Kleinsmith

QUEBEC-LABRADOR CARIBOU - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 474-6/8 396 5/8 405 1/8 Lac Dufreboy, QC 379 7/8 387 6/8 Lac Bienville, QC

Neal C. Porter Scott A. Cooper

2017 J. Ohmer 2017 A. Beaudry

HORNED GAME FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

PRONGHORN - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 96-4/8 92 93 2/8 Fremont Co., WY Douglas B. Walters 2017 87 6/8 88 6/8 Lincoln Co., NM Jerry L. Vandersnick 2017 86 6/8 87 6/8 Coconino Co., AZ Michael B. Heller 2016 86 86 Yavapai Co., AZ Marvin N. Zieser 2008 85 6/8 86 2/8 Sweetwater Co., WY Justin N. Trail 2017 85 4/8 86 1/8 Yavapai Co., AZ Matthew L. Ortiz 2017 84 6/8 84 7/8 Neville, SK David J. Herber 2017 84 6/8 85 3/8 Sweetwater Co., WY Jerry L. Vandersnick 2017 84 4/8 86 3/8 Carbon Co., UT Matthew C. Reetz 2016 84 84 4/8 Sweetwater Co., WY Mark K. Simas 2017 83 6/8 84 4/8 Lincoln Co., CO Brian K. Burns 2017 83 6/8 84 4/8 Rosebud Co., MT Erik J. Helland 2017 83 2/8 83 4/8 Mora Co., NM Ernie Davis 2017 82 6/8 83 1/8 Eureka Co., NV Jeffrey R. Cummings 2017 82 6/8 83 2/8 Fremont Co., WY Matthew J. 2017 Vandersnick 82 4/8 84 Lassen Co., CA David P. Trask 2017 82 82 3/8 Carbon Co., WY Matthew L. Howell 2017 82 82 6/8 Fremont Co., WY Ernest A. Shotton 2017 82 82 3/8 Huerfano Co., CO Kelly R. Yates 2017 82 82 6/8 Meade Co., SD Picked Up 2017 81 2/8 81 4/8 Natrona Co., WY Ashley M. Borden 2017 81 81 4/8 Sweetwater Co., WY Kevin A. May 2017 80 6/8 82 6/8 Custer Co., CO Randy C. Rusk 2017 80 6/8 81 7/8 Las Animas Co., CO Andre Leclercq 2017 80 4/8 81 3/8 Fremont Co., WY Eric J. Horst 2017 80 4/8 82 3/8 Lincoln Co., NM James K. Lines 2017 80 4/8 81 1/8 Yavapai Co., AZ Marvin N. Zieser 1993

R. Stayner R. Stayner R. Stayner J. Utter R. Stayner M. Golightly P. Mckenzie R. Stayner L. Guldman R. Stayner B. Davies B. Zundel O. Carpenter C. Lacey R. Stayner J. Fischer B. Wilkes R. Bonander L. Gatlin J. Boke T. Atkinson V. Dana M. Trujillo L. Gatlin D. Cook R. Stayner M. Cupell

BISON - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 136-4/8 123 2/8 117 116 4/8 116 115

124 6/8 117 5/8 117 117 4/8 115 3/8

Park Co., MT Duchesne Co., UT Park Co., MT Uintah Co., UT Copper River, AK

Lon E. Bothwell Stanley D. Brown Colter L. Eaton Susan K. Hendy Jay H. Stanford

2017 2017 2015 2017 2018

P. Dalrymple W. Norton B. Zundel D. Jones R. Deis

ROCKY MOUNTAIN GOAT - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 57-4/8 54 2/8 54 3/8 Keremeos, BC Gregory A. Biddinger 2017 B. Ryll 51 6/8 52 2/8 Idaho Co., ID Michael D. Terherst 2017 L. Finney 49 4/8 49 4/8 Uintah Co., UT Charles D. Nuesmeyer 2015 B. Capes 49 4/8 50 2/8 Wallowa Co., OR Patrick C. Romane 2017 T. Rozewski 49 49 2/8 Snowbank Creek, BC Benjamin Receveur 2017 R. Berreth 48 6/8 49 Telkwa Range, BC John S. Kohout 2017 K. Witt 47 6/8 48 1/8 Mount Edziza, BC Frederick E. Hilger 2017 S. Ashley 47 6/8 47 6/8 Pine Lake, BC Guy G. Antonacci 2017 C. Lieser 47 4/8 48 4/8 Bonneville Co., ID Bryan S. Hancock 2017 E. Bartholomew MUSK OX - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 129

TOP TO BOTTOM:

B&C Associate Matthew L. Ortiz took this pronghorn, scoring 85-4/8 points, in 2017 while on a hunt in Yavapai County, Arizona. This musk ox, scoring 106-2/8 points, was taken by B&C Associate Brad A. Sutter near Toksook Bay, Alaska in 2018. In 2016 while on a hunt in Taos County, New Mexico, John W. McKenna, Jr., harvested this bighorn sheep scoring 182 points.

88 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

110 111 3/8 Nunivak Island, AK 108 4/8 109 7/8 Nunivak Island, AK 106 2/8 109 Toksook Bay, AK 106 110 1/8 Holman Island, NT

Christopher T. Ledgerwood Ryan J. McGuire Brad A. Sutter Ken Hill

2018 S. Kleinsmith 2017 S. Kleinsmith 2018 S. Kleinsmith 1983 B. Nash

BIGHORN SHEEP - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 216-3/8 209 205 2/8 200 2/8 197 5/8 196 5/8 192 6/8

209 3/8 206 2/8 200 4/8 198 3/8 197 193 2/8

Lake Co., MT Lake Co., MT Fergus Co., MT Silver Bow Co., MT Castle River, AB Chouteau Co., MT

Picked Up Picked Up Brenten J. Williams Shawnee D. Hjelt Cameron T. Foss Bobbie J. Shepherd

2016 2016 2017 2017 2017 2017

J. Williams J. Williams J. Williams F. King C. Dillabough R. Burtis

BIGHORN SHEEP CONTINUED 188 3/8 189 5/8 Pine Ridge Indian Res., SD 187 4/8 187 5/8 Baker Co., OR 187 4/8 188 7/8 Line Creek, BC 184 2/8 184 3/8 Carbon Co., UT 184 2/8 184 4/8 Ghost River, AB 183 2/8 184 Elk Valley, BC 183 1/8 184 1/8 Taos Co., NM 182 4/8 183 3/8 Whitehorse Creek, AB 182 182 2/8 Taos Co., NM 181 5/8 182 5/8 Yavapai Co., AZ 181 2/8 183 5/8 Greenlee Co., AZ 180 2/8 180 5/8 Greenlee Co., AZ 180 180 4/8 Phillips Co., MT 179 4/8 179 6/8 Jackson Co., CO 177 7/8 179 3/8 Larimer Co., CO

Picked Up

2016 R. Rippentrop

Casey P. Brooks 2017 Bernard A. 2000 Fiedeldey, Jr. Michael J. Sperry 2017 James Harold 1944 Brady A. Annett 2017 Bernard A. 1999 Fiedeldey, Jr. Bernard A. 2005 Fiedeldey, Jr. John W. McKenna, Jr. 2016 David L. Hussey 2017 Brett R. Kenner 2017 Doyle D. Hancock 2017 Newman C. 2017 Whittington Brian D. Tallerico 2017 J. Bryan Gwinn 2017

D. Morris R. Wood A. Wood G. Villnow D. Patterson M. Serio

TOP TO BOTTOM:

This bighorn sheep, scoring 179-4/8 points, was taken by Brian D. Tallerico while on a hunt in Jackson County, Colorado, in 2017. In 2018, B&C Associate Wayne J. Schottler harvested this 181-6/8-point desert sheep while on a hunt in Coahuila, Mexico. He was shooting a 7mm Remington Mag.

M. Serio D. Waldbillig W. Keebler B. Ihlenfeldt R. Stayner B. Milliron E. Boley J. Legnard

DESERT SHEEP - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 205-1/8 181 6/8 182 3/8 Coahuila, MX 179 7/8 181 2/8 Hidalgo Co., NM 179 4/8 179 5/8 Clark Co., NV 178 6/8 179 Lincoln Co., NV 178 4/8 179 4/8 Sonora, MX 178 178 3/8 Coahuila, MX 177 1/8 177 5/8 Coahuila, MX 175 6/8 176 1/8 Brewster Co., TX 175 4/8 177 1/8 Lincoln Co., NV 175 175 2/8 Tiburon Island, MX 173 4/8 174 San Bernardino Co., CA 173 3/8 174 5/8 Nye Co., NV 173 1/8 174 Mohave Co., AZ 172 4/8 175 1/8 San Carlos Indian Res., AZ 172 3/8 173 6/8 Graham Co., AZ 171 5/8 172 3/8 Sonora, MX 171 4/8 173 5/8 Clark Co., NV 170 6/8 171 1/8 Churchill Co., NV 170 2/8 171 Brewster Co., TX 170 170 5/8 Clark Co., NV 169 2/8 170 3/8 San Bernardino Co., CA 168 6/8 169 Kane Co., UT 168 5/8 170 6/8 La Paz Co., AZ 168 4/8 168 7/8 San Bernardino Co., CA 167 4/8 169 4/8 San Bernardino Co., CA 167 1/8 167 4/8 Esmeralda Co., NV 167 167 1/8 Clark Co., NV 167 167 2/8 Nye Co., NV 166 2/8 167 6/8 Churchill Co., NV 165 4/8 166 6/8 Chihuahua, MX

Wayne J. Schottler Thomas K. Drake Jacob T. Rosevear Paul Price D. Richard P. Giffin Carean Goss Michael F. Maestri Bernard A. Fiedeldey, Jr. Anthony H. Cooney James K. Lines Thomas A. Marquez

2018 2017 2017 2017 2016 2017 2018 2008

J. Pallister J. Browning S. Sanborn C. Lacey D. Williams G. Mefford G. Mefford M. Pittman

Tamra B. Boyce John C. Barczak, Jr. Patrick J. Warr

2017 L. Clark 2017 F. Giuliani 2016 B. Capes

2017 L. Clark 2017 J. Pallister 2017 A. Sandoval

Chase G. Howard 2016 Joseph B. Hollis 2017 Edward R. Frazer 2017 Michael D. Marchese 2017 Bernard A. 2003 Fiedeldey, Jr. Connor L. Bohach 2015 Brandon J. Hushbeck 2018

P. Dalrymple D. Hart T. Humes T. Humes K. Kelso L. Clark D. Perrien

Graig H. Ogden Edward H. Elms Anthony J. Welch

2017 W. Bowles 2017 E. Buckner 2017 H. Grounds

David L. York

2017 R. McDrew

Terrence J. Mick Shawn C. Lynch Carl E. Jackson Jeff A. Schweighart Phillip J. Smith

2017 2017 2017 2017 2017

C. Collins H. Grounds S. Sanborn D. Hart B. Harriman

Statement of Ownership, Management, and Circulation

1. Publication Title: Fair Chase 2. Publication Number: 1077-3274 3. Filing Date: 9/27/2018 4. Issue Frequency: Quarterly 5. Number of Issues Published Annually: Four 6. Annual Subscription Price: $35.00 7. Complete Mailing Address of Known Office of Publication: Boone and Crockett Club, 250 Station Drive, Missoula, MT 59801-2753 Contact Person: Karlie Slayer Telephone: 406/542-1888 8. Complete Mailing Address of Headquarters of Publisher: Boone and Crockett Club, 250 Station Drive, Missoula, MT 59801-2753 9. Full Names and Complete Mailing Addresses of Publisher, Editor, and Managing Editor: Publisher - Boone and Crockett Club, 250 Station Drive, Missoula, DALL’S SHEEP - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 189-6/8 MT 59801-2753 Editor - Doug Painter, Boone and Crockett Club, 250 Station Drive, Missoula, MT 59801-2753 Managing Editor - Karlie Slayer, Boone and Crockett Club, 250 Station Drive, 172 4/8 173 2/8 Donjek River, YT Billy D. Grissom 2017 C. Walker Missoula, MT 59801-2753 10. Owner: Boone and Crockett Club, 250 Station Drive, Missoula, 162 2/8 163 2/8 Jo-Jo Lake, YT Steven J. McFadden 2017 R. Avery MT 59801-2753 11. Known Bondholders, Mortgagees, and Other Security Holders: None 12. Tax Status: Has Not Changed During the Preceding 12 Months 13. Publication Title: Fair Chase 14. Issue Date for Circulation Data: Winter 2018 15. Extent and Nature of Circulation – Average No. STONE’S SHEEP - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 196-6/8 Copies Each Issue During Preceding 12 Months and No. Copies of Single Issue Published Nearest 176 3/8 176 7/8 Muncho Lake, BC Marvin Bolling 1966 G. Villnow to Filing Date (respectively): a. Total Number of Copies: 7,000 and 7,600 b. Paid Circulation (1) Mailed Outside-County Paid Subscriptions Stated on PS Form 3541: 4,110 and 4,235 (2) Mailed In172 1/8 172 3/8 Mount Edziza, BC David M. Billings 2016 B. Capes County Paid Subscriptions Stated on PS Form 3541: 0 and 0 (3) Paid Distribution Outside the Mails Including Counter Sales and Other Paid Distribution Outside USPS: 0 and 0 (4) Paid Distribution by Other Classes of Mail Through the USPS: 724 and 629 c. Total Paid Distribution: 4,832 and 4,864 d. Free or Nominal Rate Distribution (1) Free or Nominal Rate Outside-County Copies Included on PS Form 3541: 1,702 and 1,645 (2) Free or Nominal Rate In-County Copies Included on PS Form 3541: 0 and 0 (3) Free or Nominal Rate Copies Mailed at Other Classes Through the USPS: 43 and 45 (4) Free or Nominal Rate Distribution Outside the Mail: 197 and 196 e. Total Free or Nominal Rate Distribution: 1,942 and 1,886 f. Total Distribution: 6,776 and 6,750 g. Copies Not Distributed: 224 and 250 h. Total: 7,000 and 7,000 i. Percent Paid: 71.34% and 72.06% 16. Publication of Statement of Ownership: X If the publication is a general publication, publication of this statement is required. Will be printed in the Winter 2018 issue of this publication.

Share your field photos with us! @BooneandCrockettClub #booneandcrockettclub

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 89

CAUGHT ON CAMERA TRAIL CAMERA PHOTOS FROM BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S THEODORE ROOSEVELT MEMORIAL RANCH Dupuyer, Montana

90 FA I R CH A S E | WI N T E R 20 1 8

ONLY

50 LEFT

Classic Cloth Edition

Deluxe Leather Edition

Limited to 5000 sets, bound in brilliant cloth covers with French fold double-sided dust jackets and 650+ pages of high resolution photos and content.

Signed, numbered & limited to 500 sets, hand-bound in premium Tuscan leather with hand-crafted clamshell case. 650+ pages of high resolution photos and content. Only 50 left.

SPECIA &C

20% OFF C CODE B

Special 20% Discount for Boone & Crockett Members in Memory of Authors and Fellow B&C Members: Robert M. Lee & R.L. Wilson

China Safari By Robert M. Lee

The Art of the Gun – MINIATURE BOOK SET – By Robert M. Lee & R.L. Wilson This 5-volume miniature book set, measuring 4¾” x 6”, features highly decorated arms from the Renaissance to the 21st century from Mr. Lee’s private Arms & Armor Collection. Averaging 75 pages per volume, each book features dramatic fold-outs, and illustrations.

Travel with Bob Lee through ancient China and his historic rediscovery of the fabled Marco Polo sheep in the majestic Pamir Mountains of Central Asia. One of the first Westerners allowed to hunt in China in modern times, Mr. Lee conducted five scientific expeditions in the 1980’s to the “Roof of the World” & proved that the Ovis Poli did exist on Chinese territory.

FAIR CH AS E | WI N T E R 2 0 1 8 91

OWN THE ASCENT STAND AT THE TOP WITH THIS LIGHT-WEIGHT KIMBER RIFLE.

kimber mountain ascent™ starting at 4 pounds 13 ounces | 22-26 inch barrel available in 7mm-08 rem, .308 win, 6.5 creedmoor, .270 win, .280 ack imp, .30-06 sprg, 300 wsm, 270 wsm, .300 win mag, 7mm rem mag

SUB MOA

a c c u r a c y s t a n d a r d

made in a merica

what all guns should be™

(888) 243-4522 kimberamerica.com