Fair Chase Summer 2018 by Boone and Crockett Club

SUMMER 2018 | $9.95

NEW WORLDâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S RECORD BIGHORN SHEEP

DSCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mission is to ensure the conservation of wildlife through public engagement, education and advocacy for well-regulated hunting and sustainable use.

JOIN US!

DSC CONVENTION & SPORTING EXPO i JANUARY 17-20, 2019 info@biggame.org I www.biggame.org I 2

FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Dallas Safari Club I (972) 980-9800

TABLE OF CONTENTS 6

FROM THE EDITOR

FROM THE PRESIDENT | Precautionary Principle

CAPITOL COMMENTS | 83 Years and Counting

ACCURATE HUNTER | The Close Encounter

REQUIEM FOR REMINGTON?

THINGS YOU MAY HAVE HEARD ABOUT CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE

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

Volume 34 n Number 2 n Summer 2018

18. Requiem for Remington?

26. Things You May Have Heard about Chronic Wasting Disease

Steven Williams

Craig Boddington

Wayne van Zwoll

David Hewitt, Charlie DeYoung, Randy DeYoung, Bill Eikenhorst, F. Butch Weckerly, Matthew Wagner, and Ivan Castro-Arellano

GENETICS IN WHITETAIL DEER: IT’S ABOUT MORE THAN JUST LARGE ANTLERS

GET INVOLVED | Tracking the Capitols

PRESS RELEASE | Boone and Crockett Club Congratulates Congress on Passage of Sportsmen’s Legislation Package

50. Prehistoric Pursuits

B.B. Hollingsworth, Jr.

58. If There’s No Chase, is the Hunt Still Fair?

Doug Painter

W. David Walter

40 SCIENCE BLASTS | Is Wildlife Management Science-Based? John F. Organ 44

EDUCATING THE NEXT GENERATION OF CONSERVATION LEADERS

HUNT RIGHT; HUNT FAIR CHASE

PREHISTORIC PURSUITS

PRESS RELEASE | Wildlife Management Institute Honored by Boone and Crockett Club

Mississippi State University

IF THERE’S NO CHASE, IS THE HUNT STILL FAIR?

THE FLATHEAD LAKE MONSTER

CAN IT MAKE YOU A MORE ETHICAL HUNTER?

TROPHY TALK | For the Record

GENERATION NEXT | 30th Awards Youth Trophy List

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

62. The Flathead Lake Monster

@BooneAndCrockettClub #BooneAndCrockettClub

The new World’s Record bighorn sheep photographed on Wild Horse Island by B&C Official Measurer L. Victor Clark.

John Whipple

Robert D. Brown

Justin Spring

Keith Balfourd

Justin Spring

CAUGHT ON CAMERA

Photos from the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial Ranch FAIR CHASE | SUM M 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.

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.

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 Ivan Castro-Arellano Charlie DeYoung Randy DeYoung Bill Eikenhorst David Hewitt B.B. Hollingsworth, Jr. John F. Organ Doug Painter Justin Spring Matthew Wagner W. David Walter F. Butch Weckerly John Whipple Steven Williams Wayne van Zwoll Photographic Contributors Tony Bynum L. Victor Clark 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.

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

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

CLUB

NATIONAL ADVERTISING

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

VISIONS FOR WILDLIFE AND CONSERVATION

FAIR CHASE PRODUCTION STAFF

FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

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

If youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re looking for high quality game animals, the Boone and Crockett layer provides detailed information regarding trophy class species for every state in the country. For just $9.99/yr view the color-coded heat map of the US 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. For more information about the onX Hunt app go to onXmaps.com/hunt

proud supporter of

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8

FROM THE EDITOR let’s be sure they’re comfortable just being outdoors in the first place. We can no longer assume that kids “self-acclimate” to the out-of-doors the way most everyone of our generation, as a matter of course, did. I read with interest a story in the New York Times (March 11, 2018) by Ellen Barry titled, In Britain, Learning to Accept Risk, and the Occasional ‘Owie’. The article describes how educators in Britain are adding some measure of risk to school playgrounds. “Out went plastic playhouses,” notes Ms. Barry, “and in came the dicey stuff: stacks of two-by-fours, crates and loose bricks.” Ms. Barry goes on to write, “Limited risks are increasingly cast by experts as an experience essential to childhood development, useful in building resilience and grit.” Nature, of course, has all along offered the same learning experience to young people. Thorny vines, wet, moss-covered rocks, and shiny three-leafed plants all encourage kids to watch their step and keep their wits about them. The occasional “owie” reinforces the lesson. I was having lunch with a group of men with whom I play golf and happened to

Whatever we might see or experience in nature, it’s a lesson well learned and time well spent with youngsters. If we would like them to join us as hunters someday, let’s be sure they’re comfortable just being outdoors in the first place. 6

FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

mention that I had missed our last outing because I had been hunting ducks and geese in Nebraska along the North Platte River. As the conversation turned to hunting, I learned that five of the eight men at our table were hunters but none of them had gone afield since retiring to Georgia. Apparently, it’s a lot easier to find new golf partners than new hunting partners. To get the ball rolling, I’m looking to schedule a quail hunt with these guys for next fall. It’s no secret that the bulk of our hunting population has long been comprised of the Baby Boom generation. Indeed, the high-water mark for hunting participation in America, the early 1980s, was the time when the youngest of this post-war generation was old enough to join the rest of that generation in the field. The years have rolled on, though. Of the 75 million men and women who comprise the

Doug Painter EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Baby Boom generation, 50 million are today over 65 years-of-age. In 12 years, all of us in this generation will be 65 or older. Over the years, we have been reminded by many in our ranks to, “Take a kid hunting.” Nowadays, I would suggest that we add to that notion by saying, “Take a grandkid hunting.” Like the osprey, I’m sure there are still lots of us ready, willing and able to give it another shot. Hope to see you down the trail. n

I was walking along a nature trail not far from our home on Skidaway Island, a barrier island off Georgia’s coast, when off to my right I caught sight of an osprey in full-dive mode. This aerial hunter hit the surface of a nearby saltwater lagoon with a splash and soon after emerged with a silvery mullet in its talons. With some vigorous flapping, the bird was able to gain altitude and seemed on its way to completing a successful mission. On my left, though, I saw a bald eagle come off its perch from a towering loblolly pine and swoop down toward the osprey. The eagle went on to harass the osprey till it dropped the mullet from its grasp. The eagle then flew down to gather his “easy pickin’s.” The osprey returned to circling high above the lagoon, back in the hunt once again. I wish my grandkids had been along to watch this drama. We’ve all seen bizarre pet tricks and such on YouTube videos, but nature may well still be the best channel around. Whatever we might see or experience in nature, it’s a lesson well learned and time well spent with youngsters. If we would like them to join us as hunters someday,

VX-FREEDOM

VX-FREEDOM TWILIGHT LIGHT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SCRATCH-RESISTANT LENSES EASY-TO-READ ADJUSTMENTS FOGPROOF, WATERPROOF, AND GUARANTEED FOR LIFE

#BERELENTLESS

LEUPOLD.COM

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8

PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

The small group of wildlife professionals creating confusion about CWD questions some of the disease’s most basic attributes, including its identity as a disease and its ability to kill deer. Do not fall victim to these misconceptions. Hewitt and colleagues explain that despite CWD’s atypical disease agent (prions), it is a disease recognized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The authors also describe how deer can die directly from clinical CWD or be compromised by it, making them susceptible to death by other causes such as predators and vehicle collisions. Whether CWD causes death directly (which it can) or indirectly, CWD has the ability to reduce deer populations with negative effects on the hunting industry. Clearly, this is cause for concern.

The naysayers would also have you believe that a misleading view of CWD’s rarity—it occurs in four percent of U.S. counties—makes it an insignificant “non-factor.” In fact, CWD extends from Texas to Alberta and Utah to New York, not to mention its presence outside the country. Failing to classify this range as “widely spread,” as the naysayers do, is unreasonable. In their peer-reviewed CWD factsheet, Hewitt and colleagues describe the rapid spread of CWD from Colorado and Wyoming to the Midwest, central Canada, and the Great Lakes in only 20 years. Although the naysayers claim that CWD cannot be prevented or controlled, it is clear that stopping movement of infected deer will help prevent the spread of CWD. Indeed, stopping movement of CWD is the most powerful

B.B. Hollingsworth, Jr. PRESIDENT

management tool we have; once it is established, there are no viable options for eliminating it. CWD is a fatal, widely spread disease that can—and should—be prevented and controlled. Fearful of change, the naysayers object to all of these facts. They are attempting to control the message about CWD and suppress precautionary management. Indeed, CWD is alarming, as are the changes it will cause. But these are not reasons to maintain the status quo. As passionate hunter-conservationists, it is our duty to combat CWD head-on, not fall prey to science denials. n

In a rapidly changing world, our natural resources are exposed to an array of environmental alterations and associated threats. From habitat loss and fragmentation to invasive species to financial challenges, natural resources and those who conserve them face diverse obstacles. One of the hallmarks of natural resource management is called the precautionary principle. Its basic tenet is that lack of certainty regarding environmental threats should not be used as an excuse for avoiding action to avert those threats. As threats from chronic wasting disease (CWD) continue to grow, there is a movement to thwart the precautionary principle and maintain a “business as usual” approach to deer management. Motivated by those who fear inevitable changes caused by CWD, the movement questions the relevance of this disease and confounds well-meaning efforts to manage it. The Boone and Crockett Club knows better. We continue to fund research projects to better understand the molecular structure, transmission, and detection of CWD through our William I. Spencer Conservation Grants Program. Even so, I ask you to beware of the misleading movement being advanced by CWD naysayers for reasons eloquently described by Professional Member David Hewitt and colleagues in their peer-reviewed CWD factsheet (page 26 in this issue).

FROM THE PRESIDENT

LEARN MORE: n

The precautionary principle’s basic tenet is that lack of certainty regarding environmental threats should not be used as an excuse for avoiding action to avert those threats.

Read how researching the genetics of deer is helping give more insight to CWD on page 32. In the Fall 2017 issue of Fair Chase part 3 of the CWD series outlines the Club's involvement with CWD since 2001.

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 CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8

83 YEARS AND COUNTING The more than 1,060 attendees of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference heard powerful presentations about the need for agencies and organizations to become more relevant to the American public and to expand collaborative efforts to manage our natural resources. The conference, in its 83rd year, has provided a forum to discuss the current and emerging issues facing fish and wildlife conservation. In addition, the Boone and Crockett Club held its spring meeting and annual reception and dinner at the conference. Following a well-attended plenary session, which included Keith Creagh, director of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, and Steve Smits, president of Zebco Brands-North America, attendees could choose from four concurrent special sessions. Each session focused on resource management issues and solutions facing natural resource managers. Two sessions addressed the challenge of broadening the support for and relevance of conservation efforts by expanding the outreach to resource stakeholders. Another session described the success of collaborative conservation efforts in the southeast—the Southeast Conservation Adaptation Strategy. During the conference, there was an impromptu meeting that was intended to lead to the expansion of this effort across the nation. The fourth session focused on the impact of poaching, trafficking, and illegal trade in fish and wildlife. 10 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

This session complemented the Club’s own report on this issue. While I obviously could not attend each session in its entirety, I did spend a few minutes in each. Without exception, the audience was standing room only, and audience participation was strong. Aside from the plenary and special sessions, the conference provided a venue for conservation leaders from state and federal agencies, military professionals, national conservation organizations, professional organizations, academicians, and outdoor exhibitors to interact and conduct the business of conservation. More than 75 separate council, committee, and work-group meetings, business meetings, workshops, receptions, and sessions were conducted during the five-day conference. The Wildlife Management Institute (WMI)—largely through the diligent work of WMI Projects Manager Matt Dunfee—worked with Delaney Meeting and Event Management staff to administer the conference. These individuals and their staff have succeeded in hosting a seamless and professional conference setting for many years. A consistent theme throughout this year’s conference, derived from the foundation set during the last six years of conferences, was an expanded approach to conservation that broadens collaboration among partners and seeks to engage the public in recognizing the importance of conservation to all citizens. It was apparent to all participants that, although the history of conservation

CAPITOL COMMENTS

success has been predominately financed by sportsmen’s and sportswomen’s funds, as a profession, we need to establish additional funding mechanisms to meet the public’s expectations and the resources’ needs. The Recovering America’s Wildlife Act (RAWA), recently introduced in Congress, would do just that. The America’s Alliance for Fish and Wildlife campaign leaders held a coordinating meeting at the conference to discuss strategy to pass RAWA, which would redirect existing federal revenue from offshore energy and onshore mineral royalties to statewide conservation efforts. These efforts would be directed primarily to species in need of conservation so that federal protection would not be needed. This would provide business and industry with assurances that regulatory approaches to manage these species would be unnecessary or at least provide the regulatory certainty necessary to make timely business decisions. The Boone and Crockett Club presented WMI with an award that certainly was the highlight of the conference for all WMI staff, past and present. B&C presented WMI the 2017 Conservation and Stewardship Award at the B&C dinner. The award recognized that WMI shares the same core values of the Boone and Crockett Club and its founder Theodore Roosevelt. The award states, “The Boone

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

and Crockett Club honors the past, present, and future of the Wildlife Management Institute and its unique role in representing the highest standard of excellence in facilitating strategies, actions, decisions, and programs to benefit wildlife and habitat, professional wildlife and conservation management and our hunting heritage.” I had the privilege of accepting this award on behalf of the current WMI staff and the many dedicated WMI employees who have worked tirelessly for professional wildlife conservation since our inception in 1911. Once again, I would like to thank B&C President Ben Hollingsworth, Jr., and all the B&C members and staff for making the 83rd Conference such an incredible experience for all of us here at WMI. WMI is proud of this achievement, and we pledge our continued commitment to live up to its high standards as we continue our path forward into the future. n

Read more about the Boone and Crockett Club’s Conservation and Stewardship Award on page 56.

THE LARGEST, MOST IMMERSIVE

FISH AND WILDLIFE ATTRACTION IN THE WORLD.

Pack for adventure and come travel around the world with a visit to the WOW wildlife galleries. State-of-the-art 4D dioramas completely surround visitors within the sights, sounds and smells of the planet’s most extreme wildlife habitats. Each environment features meticulous attention to detail including massive hand-painted murals, native foliage, and special effects that deliver the chill of the Arctic, the cold winds of the Alps, the dry sun of the African Savanna and more.

artifacts and milestones that celebrate conservation efforts. Visitors will experience the story of conservation from the Native Americans to Lewis and Clark to Teddy Roosevelt and the wildlife management practices championed by hunters and anglers that helped shape the conservation movement.

The wildlife galleries were inspired by Johnny Morris’ lifetime spent in nature and his deep admiration for fellow hunter and angler conservationists like Roosevelt and Audubon. These conservation heroes, through time spent hunting and fishing, grew to appreciate the vital importance of wildlife habitats and management. The creation of the Wonders of Wildlife Museum and Aquarium, located in the heart of America, Springfield, Missouri, establishes a destination accessible to tens of millions of people who may never have the opportunity to travel to the great museums in New York or Washington DC. Guests can get closer to record-setting game animals than ever before, stand in awe observing nature’s most striking exotic animal habitats, and discover the origins of the conservation movement with historic

Step back in time to the Boone and Crockett Heads and Horns collection recreated within the Wildlife Galleries!

LOCATED NEXT TO BASS PRO SHOPS SPRINGFIELD, MO USA

RESERVE YOUR TICKETS TODAY! VISIT WONDERSOFWILDLIFE.ORG

BP172292

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 11

“HE IS WARY;

GREAT SKILL AND CAUTION MUST BE SHOWN IN APPROACHING HIM;

and no one but a good climber, with a steady head, sound lungs, and trained muscles, can successfully hunt him in his own rugged fastnesses.” - THEODORE ROOSEVELT Research of the island’s sheep populations began in the 1950s under the guidance of past Boone and Crockett Club Records Chairman Dr. Philip L. Wright from the University of Montana. At the outset of the research, it was noted the native grasses were being heavily grazed. Much of this early research took place looking into the high prevalence of lungworm of the sheep. The scientific literature at the time revealed most populations around the West were declining, but the island’s sheep population was rapidly increasing. Reading these thesis papers reveals these budding sheep biologists were really at the forefront of wildlife capture techniques. © TONY BYNUM

PG. 62 THE FLATHEAD LAKE MONSTER BY JUSTIN SPRING

12 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

A message brought to you by

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 13

CRAIG BODDINGTON PROFESSIONAL MEMBER Photos Courtesy of Author

ACCURATE HUNTER THE CLOSE ENCOUNTER

Despite the current rage

for long-range shooting it’s important to remember that close shots can occur almost anywhere. Bowhunters deal with this routinely; despite the challenge, they get close! Primarily a rifle hunter, I’m usually prepared for a longish shot, but I ascribe to the motto, “Get as close as you can, then get ten yards closer!”

In the context of rifle hunting, “close” means on the near side of 100 yards, not half that distance archers strive for. Even so, pointblank encounters do occur. In North America, game usually taken at longer ranges includes wild sheep, pronghorns, and Coues’ whitetail. My longest on-average shots have been on Elliott Coues’ deer. However, with all three of these animals, I’ve had shots well within 40 yards, good bow range. Let’s not forget, too, that legions of American deer hunters sally forth with open-sighted .30-30s and smoothbore slug guns. Limitations of equipment dictate close encounters!

Thousands of whitetail hunters go afield with open-sighted .30-30s and smoothbore slug guns. Their shots must be close, but in many situations, this is normal and accuracy is adequate. At close range, it’s more about speed than precision. 14 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Red-dot or reflex sights drive the shooter to keep both eyes open. This is valuable for close-range shooting because you keep binocular vision, maintain peripheral vision, and have an unlimited field of view. This is an Aimpoint Hunter Model, non-magnifying but scope-like in appearance. This excellent Alaska moose jumped from its bed at 20 yards. The target was huge, but regardless of distance and size of animal, it’s essential to place the shot in the vital zone. Fast offhand shooting only comes with serious practice.

At any range the shot must be placed well, but close shots are different from more deliberate encounters at longer ranges. Almost universal is time, plus the reality that any movement to get into position may scotch the chance. Occasionally we’re blessed with a quick glimpse of a mostly-obscured animal; perhaps we see it ambling our way, or maybe terrain allows a very close approach. Then we might have time to plan the shot and take a rest. Bowhunters have to be close but must seek a stealthy opportunity to come to full draw. Often, however, the close encounter is a “take it or leave it” shot. The opportunity is now and it’s not likely to get better! Tree stand whitetail hunters deal with this constantly. Most of my elevated deer stands have padded safety rails that double as gun rests—nice if the shot allows their use. But in that game, despite the best planning, the deer dictate the shot and might approach from any angle. Often an unsupported shot is the only opportunity, and sometimes I’ve leaned and twisted like a contortionist when a buck appears in an unexpected quarter (safety harness!). On the ground, a close encounter can happen at almost any time or place. Most areas aren’t quite as open as they seem; often there are hidden folds that might hold the game you seek. So, it’s wise to be prepared and to be ready. Preparation means practice; at close range, the clock is ticking. If you haven’t been discovered, chances are you will be…soon! My old friend and mentor, the late John Wootters, once said that he wished sporting rifles had a cutoff switch that would prevent them from firing unless steadily rested, stating that there’d be a lot less wounded game. For the latter thought I suppose he’s correct, but there are times, always and only at close range, where the options are to raise the rifle and shoot, or pass the shot. I suspect few of us have the discipline to consistently pass, so it’s best to practice. Standing unsupported or “offhand” is the least steady and least accurate shooting position. It should be avoided if any other option exists. But since it’s the most

ABOVE: Most of our Kansas tree stands have a safety bar that doubles as a gun rest. That’s handy if the deer approach as expected, but the deer dictate the shot and can come from anywhere, so unsupported shots from weird positions aren’t unusual and need to be thought out. FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 15

difficult, it should be practiced regularly—just in case. The good news is the vital zone of big game animals offers a large target. Shot placement is everything, but pinpoint accuracy is not essential. Paper-plate accuracy is adequate, and paper plates make excellent targets for off hand shooting drills. There was a time when I was very confident shooting offhand to at least 100 yards. I’m not as steady as I once was, but I’m still paper-plate consistent to a good 60 or 70 yards. In my experience, that range covers most do-or-die, stand-up-and-shoot situations, and this is a distance that, with practice, most of us should be able to attain consistent proficiency. Familiarity with your hunting rifle is essential, but most of this practice can be done cheaply and painlessly with a .22! Sights matter. I used to be proficient with iron sights beyond 100 yards. Today I can’t resolve them well enough, so my comfort zone

has shrunk by half! Riflescopes with low magnification are faster and more precise than iron sights, but if you know longer shots are unlikely, the red-dot or reflex sights are marvelous options. Like the magnifying scope, they allow the eye to operate in just one focal plane. The red dot is fast, and of equal importance, these sights drive you to shoot with both eyes open, retaining peripheral vision and obtaining an unlimited field of view. Many of us aren’t expecting the close encounter, so we’re carrying whatever rifle we consider suitable for the most likely shots. These days, it probably wears a variable-power scope, so train yourself to keep the magnification turned down, and include offhand practice in your shooting regimen. Choosing to take an unsupported standing shot must be a conscious decision, however rapidly it is made. The last thing you should do is throw the rifle up in panic and blaze away! Standing remains the

Paper-plate drill with a Marlin .45-70 topped with an Aimpoint. For big game, “paper plate accuracy” is really adequate at all ranges, but this size target is excellent for practicing fast shooting from unsupported or hasty positions.

16 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

court of last resort, so even in a fast, close encounter, there must be evaluation: Do you have time to do something else? Can you take a couple of steps to a tree, rock, or fencepost? Would it be better to slowly drop to one knee and use the steadier kneeling position? These evolutions can also be practiced on your range. If that’s all there, should you raise the rifle slowly or just throw it up? Usually the former, but it depends; that’s part of evaluation, and you won’t get it right all the time! I’m assuming you’ve just seen the animal and you have frozen. Decisions come fast but still are based on various factors: How far is the animal? Has it seen you and also frozen? If so, then you probably have just seconds, and movement will spook it. If not, then how exposed are you, and what options exist? Realistically, an animal that’s spooked and dodging through cover while your rifle is still slung over your shoulder is not

an opportunity, but at close range there might be a quick shot if you’re ready. Being ready is partly mental, accepting that a close encounter can come at any moment, while a more distant sighting will give you more time to prepare. A variable scope should be turned down until more magnification is needed. I shoot a scope with both eyes open, so I usually keep variables at about 4X, even in thick cover. When the rifle is slung I don’t keep a round in the chamber, so that means I’m not ready. If an encounter seems likely, then the rifle should be fully loaded, safety on, and under complete control. This means a lot of loading and unloading as you sling and unsling and negotiate obstacles, but that’s okay. Ideally, I’m also playing the “what if” game: what if a buck jumps out of that ditch? Is there a rock or tree handy for a hasty rest? The most critical part is awareness, paying attention and being mentally ready.

Two shots from a big-bore in a close-range “turn and fire” drill. Essential for hunting dangerous game, close-range drills are universally valuable because a close encounter can happen almost anywhere.

None of us do this perfectly all the time. Last November I hunted whitetails on Anticosti Island, mostly still-hunting along trails through thick forest. On the first day I was dropped off on a marked trail. I slung my pack, loaded the rifle, and started slowly down the trail. I doubt I’d walked 200 yards, and I was adjusting my pack straps when a big buck bounded into the middle of the trail. He wasn’t 30 yards from me, but I wasn’t ready. I managed to get the rifle up and the safety off as he disappeared around a bend. Mentally I passed it as a Texas heart shot that I didn’t want to take—but if I’d been a bit more ready I might have had a fast quartering shot. For sure, I never saw another buck like that! Regardless of range, the shot must be placed well, but in true point-blank

encounters, there are times when the rifle is pointed more like a shotgun rather than deliberately aimed. Any and all shotgunning is thus good practice for extremely close encounters. As with shotgunning, gun fit matters; the rifle must come up on target. This is easily checked and practiced in your living room (make sure it’s empty and, these days, draw your blinds!). At the range, it can be practiced with closerange “turn and fire” shooting drills. Very close shots can occur in North America but are more common in other parts of the world. There is one other aspect to close encounters: Even if they start with a stationary animal they don’t always stay that way! We’ll save moving shots for the next column. n

The stalk on Kevin Howard’s big Vancouver Island black bear went a bit haywire, and we ended up right on top of it; a point-blank shot at a matter of feet. Both eyes open, scope turned down, and make sure the stock fits!

RECORD BOOK READY.

Since 1992, Nightforce® 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 CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 17

Requiem for Remington? WAYNE C. VAN ZWOLL

B&C PROFESSIONAL MEMBER Photos Courtesy of Author

The struggles of America’s oldest gunmaker predate the Civil War. The latest shouldn’t be the last.

Remington rifles serve millions of hunters and evoke memories of incomparable seasons afield!

18 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Probe the history of any company,

and you’ll find adversity. In the firearms industry, you needn’t dig far. Gunmakers have profited hugely from retail sales and government contracts—then lost as much to market vagaries and the tides of war. At this writing, Remington has filed for bankruptcy. It’s not the final act of a 200-year-old firm, but a first step to reorganization. Remington has taken that step before.

Full disclosure: My first shotgun was a Remington 870. My best elk to date fell to a Remington Model Seven, my biggest mule deer to a Remington 700. A rebarreled Remington 37 won a state prone title for me. So yes, I’m partial to the brand. And optimistic about its future! Richard Remington, born in 1500, would serve as a clergyman in his native England. A son, also named Richard, sired a third Richard Remington. He would become Rector of Lockington, Yorkshire. In a fit of originality, he named his son John, who further broke with tradition by sailing to America in 1637 with his wife and children. Generations later, in upstate New York, Eliphalet Remington bought 50 acres for $275 and paid laborers $7.50 an acre to log it so he could build a house. Securing another 266 acres, he added a dam on Staley Creek, then a forge. His son, Eliphalet II (“Lite”), grew up there and married Abigail Paddock. In August of 1816, Lite built a rifle in the forge. Jethro Wood of Cayuga County had yet to invent the all-metal plow.

TOP: Wayne took this pronghorn at about 300 yards with a .243 built by GreyBull Rifles on a 700 action. ABOVE: Wayne shot this bull with a Remington Model Seven in .308. He bought his first Remington in 1967.

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 19

ABOVE: The Civil War brought prosperity to Remington, but Eliphalet II died, age 70, before Appomattox. BELOW: Hiram Berdan’s famous Sharpshooters served the Union. Remington adopted his centerfire primer.

The Rolling Block sold well in Europe after the Civil War. Remington rifles are still popular abroad! 20 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

When Lite’s rifle fired the second-highest score at a local match, the winner asked for one like it. Scouring the countryside for metal to smelt, Remington built more rifles. The frontier gobbled them up. Hugh Orr had produced the nation’s first factory firearms in a Massachusetts foundry in 1748, but only U.S. arsenals at Springfield and Harper’s Ferry were mass-producing muskets in 1816. When the 363-mile Erie Canal was finished late in 1825, the cost of moving a ton of goods from New York to Buffalo dropped from $100 to $12. In January, 1828, Lite bought 100 acres on the Mohawk River for $28 an acre. Remington Arms still occupies that land, now in Ilion. The canal brought Lite to distant markets. Pulled by relays of horses, Erie Canal packets offered a 300-mile trip, Albany to Buffalo, for $14.33—meals included! Meanwhile, Eliphalet began building a new home for Lite’s young family, when on June 22, 1828, he fell from a wagon and under an iron wheel. Five days later he died. But that road would demand more of the Remingtons. On August 12, 1841, Abigail took daughter Maria for a carriage ride. Maria opened her parasol; it popped like a shot. The spirited horse lunged across a stream, smashing the carriage against an oak. Abigail was killed. The tragedy devastated Lite Remington. Still, his gunmaking enterprise prospered. With his sons, he bought the N.P. Ames Company, including the services of William Jenks, w h o ’d developed a breech-loading carbine. An improved model in 1858 fed waxed cardboard cartridges. But the brilliant Jenks was killed a year later, when he fell from a hay wagon on his farm near Washington, D.C. The Civil War brought

E. Remington & Sons $30 million in orders. The company would produce up to 1,000 rifles a day for Union forces! But Lite Remington didn’t see war’s end. After the first battle of Bull Run, he succumbed at age 70 to what was probably appendicitis. The Remington factory steamed on under sons Philo, Samuel and Eliphalet III. Then, in 1865, its heavily-mortgaged machines fell silent. The workers at Ilion’s plant were suddenly victims of peace. Remington scrambled to woo the civilian market with a new rifle. Joseph Rider’s refinements of the Leonard Geiger split-breech design had been rushed, and his rifle had fared poorly in trials against the Peabody, Henry and Sharps. But by 1866 Rider had corrected the flaws. Enter the Rolling Block Rifle. Straightforward in concept, the Rolling Block boasted sturdy parts. To load, the shooter drew the hammer to full cock, thumbed back the breech-block, inserted a cartridge, then pushed the block forward. The pivoting block interlocked with the hammer at the instant of firing. All but foolproof, this mechanism was so quick to load, a practiced shooter could fire 20 shots a minute! It was stout, too. In a test, a Rolling Block was loaded with 750 grains of powder and 40 balls, nearly to the muzzle of its 40-inch barrel. Upon firing, “nothing extraordinary occurred.” In 1866 the new rifle proved the salvation of 30 cowboys under Nelson Story as they trailed 3,000 cattle through Wyoming. With Rolling Blocks, the men repulsed an Indian attack near Fort Laramie and then were ordered to halt at Fort Kearney. After two weeks, Story, tired of the delay, quietly decamped. Hostile Sioux, led by Red Cloud and Crazy Horse, swooped from the hills. The

drovers met them with withering fire, their barrels becoming too hot to touch. Denied the expected pause in the rain of bullets, the Indians retreated. They found when they stopped to look back that the Remingtons were lethal at great range! Twice more before they reached Montana, Story and his cowboys blunted Indian attacks. Low on ammo at trail’s end, they had lost only one man. A few weeks later, Captain J.W. Fetterman and soldiers from Fort Kearney, armed with lesser rifles, were ambushed and wiped out by the Sioux. Rolling Blocks served buffalo hunters too. “Brazos” Bob McRae reported 54 kills with as many shots at one stand with his .44-90 Remington and a Malcolm scope. But long-range competition sealed the rifle’s celebrity. In 1874 Remington’s L.L. Hepburn began fashioning a firearm to beat the Irish after their recent win at Wimbledon. They had challenged “any American team” to another contest. Each team would comprise six men, firing three “rounds” at 800, 900 and 1,000 yards, 15 shots per round. A newly formed National Rifle Association, with the cities of New York and Brooklyn, each committed $5,000 to build a range for the match on Long Island’s Creed’s Farm, provided by the state of New York. In March, Remington unveiled its new target rifle, a .44-90 launching 550-grain conical bullets. In September a favored Irish team lost to the Americans and their Remington and Sharps rifles. Matches in 1875 and 1876 were won decisively by the U.S. team. A “Creedmoor” Rolling Block, with heavy barrel, tang sight, set trigger and checkered stock started at $100, six times the price of a standard model! By the 1870s, the Remington Arms factory covered

15 acres. Production peaked at 1,530 rifles a day as monthly payroll reached $140,000. In that day a restaurant dinner cost 25 cents. Despite the Rolling Block’s success in the American West and in Europe, Remington struggled to pay its bills. It diversified with agricultural tools and sewing machines. In 1872, young company executive Henry Benedict urged Philo Remington to buy rights to a new device called the typewriter. He did. But at $125, the new machine sold poorly. In 1886, to solve its cash flow problems, Remington would sell its typewriter business to Benedict for $186,000. The cost of this move would run high in the millions! Through the 1870s Remington slid inexorably toward bankruptcy. Salvation from within proved elusive. While a rifle by James Lee was later built by Remington, Lee got manufacturing rights back after 1886, when creditors had the company by the throat. (The British gleaned from Lee’s design features for the Short Magazine Lee Enfield, a battle rifle that would see action in two world wars.) Meanwhile, a bright, ambitious entrepreneur was building an empire not far from Ilion. After the Civil War, Marcellus Hartley bought a Connecticut plant that loaded rimfire cartridges for the Spencer rifle and another ammo factory in Massachusetts. In 1867, with four partners, he formed the Union Metallic Cartridge Company (U.M.C). Among orders received by a young U.M.C. was from the French Army, after defeats by Germany at Metz and Sedan. Holding Paris with despairing troops in 1870, Premier Leon Gambetta asked William Reynolds, who represented Hartley’s New York business enterprises in

Core-Lokt bullets date to the 1930s. Remington ammo had its genesis at Union Metallic Cartridge Co.

LEFT: Marcellus Hartley bought ammo plants, formed U.M.C., and later, with Winchester, bought Remington!

BELOW: Features of a Remington rifle by James Lee appeared in the British Short Magazine Lee Enfield shown here.

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 21

France, for “100,000 rifles and 18 million cartridges!” He then produced a draft on Lloyd’s for payment in full—a staggering sum! Reynolds, a practical man, replied, “But Paris is surrounded! I can’t leave!” Gambetta had a plan. In a balloon made of silk gowns pieced by French seamstresses and paid for with $1,250 in gold, Reynolds lifted off, ducking German bullets. He landed intact near Ville Roy. U.M.C. bled money at first. Then it hired A.C. Hobbs. This gifted mechanic had once accepted a challenge from the British Government to open a lock devised for the Bank of England. After 51 hours he succeeded! Hartley put Hobbs in charge of manufacturing. About then, Colonel Hiram Berdan, renowned for his sharpshooters

during the Civil War, broached an idea for stronger cartridges. Instead of blowing priming compound into a folded rim, Berdan suggested a percussion cap centered in the case head. Two flash-holes either side of a fixed anvil would channel the spark. The single-flash-hole primer developed by Edward Boxer would arrive at roughly the same time in England. While Hobbs worked furiously to hike production rates of the new cases, Hartley hunted military contracts. He signed one for 10 million cartridges to Turkey, another with the Russians for 2 million. In 1867 U.M.C. had one small plant run by 30 employees. Four years later it was boxing 400,000 cartridges a day! By 1912, U.M.C. would earn $15 million in gross receipts, 30 times Remington’s revenues! LEFT: The 721/722 rifles (1948) were economical but stout, “three rings of steel” around the cartridge head. BELOW: Accuracy like this makes Remington 700 barreled actions a top choice among custom riflemakers.

22 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Early in 1888, Marcellus Hartley and Oliver Winchester’s son-in-law, Thomas Bennett, bought E. Remington & Sons for $200,000. Hartley recruited smart inventors to help revive the firearms giant. The first military contract in this era was for the bolt-action Remington-Lee 1885 Navy Box Magazine Rifle. It would not last. On the heels of Winchester’s 1873 rifle, Remington ramped up work on repeaters. New Jersey inventor John Keene delivered a tubefed bolt-action in .45-70. But the Army rejected this expensive rifle shortly before Remington fell into receivership in 1886. In 1906 Remington came out with its Model 8 autoloader, following with the slide-action Model 14 in 1912. Both chambered the .25, .30 and .32 Remington, rimless versions of best-selling deer rounds (.25-35, .30-30 and .32 Special) in Winchester lever actions. Remington added a .35. All would appear in the company’s 81 auto and 141 pump, beginning in 1935. With no rimmed counterpart, the powerful .35 Remington was the only one available later in the Model 30 and Winchester 70 bolt rifles. In 1912 the Remington U.M.C. label appeared, though the two companies wouldn’t become one corporation for another four years. During that time, Remington helped arm American and Allied troops. The Remington Model 30 came along in 1921, with an action much like that of the 1917 Enfield, which Remington had built on contract during the Great War. Heavy and expensive, the 30 sold poorly. In 1926 it was replaced by the 30 Express, with a cockon-opening bolt and a better trigger. Its slender stock and 22-inch barrel reduced weight to 7 ¼ pounds. The 30 Express

was dropped in 1940 and succeeded the next year by the short-lived 720 High Power Rif le, designed by Oliver Loomis and A.H. Lowe. Its focus drawn immediately to the war effort, Remington would build 707,629 03A3 Springfields. These included 28,365 1903A4s with Weaver 330C 2 ½x scopes, the first sniper rifles mass-produced in the U.S. Also, it would ship 10.7 million rounds of .30-06 ball ammo and 2.4 million 50-caliber rounds. After armistice, Remington developed an economical bolt-action. The 721/722 series appeared in 1948. A washer-style recoil lug was sandwiched between its tubular receiver and a barrel shoulder. A clip extractor and plunger ejector enabled Remington to maintain “three rings of steel” around the case head while keeping a lid on expenses. The bolt handle and twin-lug bolt head were brazed in place. The bottom metal was of stamped steel. Designers Homer Young and Merle “Mike” Walker (a Benchrest competitor) held the rifle to high accuracy standards. Despite debut prices of $74.95 for the short-action 722 in .257 Roberts and .300 Savage, and $79.95 for the 721 in .270 and .30-06, these Remingtons got rave reviews. In the March 1948 issue of American Rifleman, the 721 was hailed by Julian S. Hatcher as the strongest bolt rifle available. In 1949 the .300 H&H Magnum joined the 721 roster, at $89.95. Other chamberings followed. High-grade A and B rifles were replaced in 1955 with ADLs and BDLs, designations carried over to the later 700. In late 1961, the 721/722 series was dropped, but so sound was the design, benchrest shooters continued to build rifles on 722 metal. Remington designers Wayne Leek and Charlie Campbell produced a hand-

M A D E BY

ELECTRO-OPTICS P RECISION TACTICAL-HUNTER RIFLESCOPES

WHISKEY5

™

LEVELPLEX™ RETICLE

TH-100™ LOCKING TURRET

HELLFIRE™ RETICLE

For superior long-range precision, the digital anti-cant system detects .50 or more of left or right rifle cant

Dial with speed and accuracy with 100 clicks per revolution, easy to configure zero stop and push button locking elevation turret

Precision shot placement in any weather, any light conditions, on any target with the bright red fiber-optic aiming point

sigsauer.com

#sigelectrooptics FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 23

some follow-up to the 721/722 with the Model 725. Introduced in 1958, it had the 721/722 receiver but with checkered walnut, a hinged floorplate, and hooded front and adjustable open rear sights. The decision to replace the 720 with the 721/722 preceded by four years the introduction of those rifles. At the same time, Remington planned an overhaul of its Models 81 self-loader and 141 pump. The term “Gamemaster,” already applied to the 141, was retained when the 760 appeared in 1952. A rotating, multiple-lug bolt with recessed face and a box magazine suited this rifle to the frisky .270 and .30-06. Early 760s also came in .300 Savage and .257 Roberts. In 1955 the 740 auto replaced the 81. Designed by L.R. Crittendon and William Gail, Jr., it shared the 760s profile and lock-up and came in .30-06. While the 760 would thrive until 1980, the 740 was upstaged in 1960 by the 742, which lasted another 20 years. The bolt-action Model 700 appeared as Remington’s flagship big game rifle in 1962—on an action derived from the 721/722. The tang was slimmed, the bolt knob swept and checkered. Cast bottom metal replaced

stamped. The stock was spruced up. Mike Walker gave the 700 quick lock time, snug barrel and chamber dimensions. The ADL in .222, .222 Magnum, .243, 6mm, .270, .280, .308 and .30-06 listed for $114.95. It had a blind magazine, pressed “point” checkering. The BDL, with hinged floorplate, fleur-de-lis grip patterns and white spacers, cost $139.95. Both came with iron sights. Concurrent introduction of Remington’s new 7mm Magnum cartridge hiked rifle sales. Safari-style 700s, with braked 26-inch barrels in .375 H&H and .458 Winchester ($310) were, in fact, leftover 725 Kodiaks. The 20-inch barrels initially paired with standard chamberings were replaced by 22inch in 1964. Beginning in 1966, Remington manufactured 700s for military and police forces. Custom Shop foreman Paul Gogol designed a sniper rifle on a 40X action. It won a Marine Corps contract. Substituting the 700 action, Remington built 995 of these M-40 sniper rifles, fitting many with Redfield 3-9x scopes. In 7.62 NATO (.308), the M-40 served in Viet Nam. A decade later, Remington would produce for the Army 2,510 M700 SWS (Sniper Weapon System) rifles

with long actions and Kevlar-reinforced synthetic stocks. Under Leupold M3A 10x scopes they shot into 1.3inch AMR (average mean radius) at 200 yards! The 700 sporting rifle series got its first facelift in 1969. Four years later, Remington introduced a left-bolt, leftstock 700, in .270, .30-06 and 7mm Magnum. Myriad versions of the 700 have followed. Remington has fielded other bolt rifles. Model 600 and 660 carbines had dogleg bolt handles like the XP-100 pistol from which they derived. Slow sellers, the rifles hung on from 1964 to 1971. The 788 was an economical but sturdy rear-locking gun made from 1967 to 1983. Remington’s short-action Model Seven, introduced in 1983, has thrived. The 78 (really a 700 in plain dress) has not. Manufactured from 1984 to 1989, it had a hardwood stock. The 673 Guide Rifle, built from 2003 to 2006, chambered the 6.5 and .350 Remington Magnum in a 660-Magnum-style rifle with a Model Seven action. Another jewel: the Model 798 on Zastava Mauser metal, announced in 2006. Safari Grade .375s and .458s boasted handsome laminated stocks. The 798 succumbed quickly to a policy by

Long a part of North America’s hunting tradition, Remington actively supports conservation groups.

24 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Cerberus to market only Remington actions. By most measures, Remington’s fortunes have flagged during its tenure as a vassal of Cerberus Capital. Still, the gunmaker endures. It has faced other financial hurdles and will no doubt clear this one. Meanwhile, it remains a vital part of the industry it helped launch 200 years ago. While its firearms and cartridges serve millions of hunters each year, they also evoke for as many outdoorsmen and women fond memories of their youth, of seasons afield with families and mentors, of precious times that won’t return. Remington’s contributions to war efforts, and its support of hunting and wildlife conservation over many decades, represent value far above that of its products. In donations and partnerships, endorsements and sponsorships, Remington has raised many millions of dollars to fuel organizations like the Boone and Crockett Club, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and Wildlife Management Institute—groups working on behalf of responsible hunters and the wildlife they support. Yes, Remington has a steep road ahead, but no steeper than the path that has brought it this far. n

Guns for

Conservation

A dynamic way to support the Boone and Crockett Club

“Donated by B&C Member Terry Fricks, this Jack O’Connor tribute riﬂe is now available at $20,000.

The Boone and Crockett Club is fortunate to serve a membership that shares a profound dedication to the mission. Now it is a pleasure to introduce Guns For Conservation, a program that creates a great way to contribute to the Boone and Crockett Club.

Guns For Conservation provides you with the opportunity to support the Club through the donation of ﬁrearms, sporting collectibles, wildlife art and hunting books. The program is both simple and ﬂexible, allowing contributions to be made at any time, scheduled over time or formally integrated into the estate planning process.

Funds raised from the Guns For Conservation program are placed in the Boone and Crockett Club Foundation endowment where the principal remains intact, and the annual interest income is then dedicated to vital conservation programs.

The Club has chosen to work with our friends at Sportsman’s Legacy to ensure that every aspect of the program will be handled legally and professionally. Market valuations will be carefully prepared and items will be properly presented on the national stage to ensure they return full value.

Support the Boone and Crockett Club by contributing:

Firearms Sporting Collectibles Wildlife Art Books & Accessories

For additional information regarding the Guns For Conservation program or to discuss a contribution, please contact Jodi Bishop at Jodi@boone-crockett.org or 406/542-1888. FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 25

Things You May Have Heard about Chronic Wasting Disease

“CWD is not new news, but its threat to deer and elk is increasing, which should be a concern to every sportsman,” said Ben B. Hollingsworth Jr., “As hunterconservationists, we’ve had to address threats to wildlife before, but none like this.” B&C Press release on Chronic Wasting Disease

On March 29, 2018, the Boone and Crockett Club officially released a position statement on Chronic Wasting Disease. Read all of our position statements online at www.Boone-Crockett.org.

This article was published in the February 2018 issue of Texas Wildlife magazine. It is reprinted here with permission of the Texas Wildlife Association.

26 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

DAVID HEWITT, CHARLIE DEYOUNG, RANDY DEYOUNG, BILL EIKENHORST, F. BUTCH WECKERLY, MATTHEW WAGNER, IVAN CASTRO-ARELLANO

The prominence of chronic wasting disease (CWD) in the

media waxes as new cases are discovered and wanes as the publicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interest fades once the diseaseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s presence ceases to be novel. Chronic wasting disease is different from many other deer diseases in that its effects are initially subtle and take months to years to manifest in an animal. The effects of CWD on populations take even longer to become evident. In fact, CWD was first detected in free-ranging deer and elk in the early 1980s and only in the past 10 years have scientists been able to document effects of CWD on populations and even then, only in the areas of Colorado and Wyoming where CWD was first detected.

Chronic wasting disease disrupts the world of people who care about deer and other ungulates. This disruption begins with regulations to determine where the disease is located, to prevent its spread, and sometimes to try to eradicate it before it gains a foothold. Over the long-term, CWD can cause change by decreasing annual survival, thereby reducing the number of deer that can be harvested and eventually lowering deer density. Change is unpleasant and people respond to it in different ways. Some recognize the problem and act to address it. Others deny the change and strive to maintain the world the way it was. FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 27

There is a campaign, arising from fear of the change caused by CWD, to marginalize CWD as a management issue. The campaign has been intense, occurring in presentations, lay publications, and the internet. Tellingly, the central ideas behind this campaign have never appeared in a publication subject to scientific peer-review, and in fact, are in direct contrast to the recommendations of wildlife veterinarians and epidemiologists. Although CWD has been a topic of intense discussion for several years, we constantly field questions from concerned land stewards about the disease. This article provides a counterweight to things you may have heard about CWD from those who feel CWD is of no significance. Following are 7 statements you may have heard about CWD and reasons why these statements are misleading at best and absolutely false at worst. 1) CWD IS NOT A DISEASE.

Because CWD does not have obvious and immediate impacts and because it is not caused by a typical disease agent, such as a virus or bacterium, deniers suggest that CWD is not a disease, but simply a condition or a syndrome. It is important to note that CWD is always fatal, is caused by a disease agent, can be spread from infected animals to healthy animals, and causes holes to form in the animal’s brain, resulting in the animal progressively losing its ability to avoid danger, eat food, and walk or function normally. CWD is clearly a disease and is listed as a disease by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

2) CWD IS NOT A COMMON DISEASE IN THE UNITED STATES. TRUE, BUT MISLEADING.

People not concerned about CWD state that 97 percent of the 1.17 million deer and elk tested in 14 years had CWD results of “not detected,” and CWD has been detected in only 4 percent of counties in the United States. These facts are not disputed, but their implication is disputed on two accounts. First, CWD is not common in the United States, but neither is meningococcal disease (human disease with 1.2 cases/1 million people). However, rarity does not mean unimportant. Just as human health officials act quickly when meningitis is detected in the United States, so too should wildlife managers do everything they can to keep from having CWD become established in their ungulate herds. In fact, CWD differs from meningococcal disease in some critical ways. Meningitis outbreaks can be managed and the disease can be eradicated from an area. In contrast, CWD cannot be eradicated once established because the abnormal prion proteins (the disease agent) persist in the environment; all indications are that the disease will be present in the environment for years or even decades. The best offense against CWD is a rock-solid defense to keep CWD from being introduced into a deer population. Thus, the goal of all CWD management programs is to keep the disease rare. Second, CWD is not equally prevalent across the United States, so defining the population as deer throughout North America is misleading. The disease has not been detected in most places in the United States. But, where CWD has been detected, it can have high prevalence. As might be expected, prevalence increases the longer the disease has been present in an area. Thus, some populations in the endemic areas of Colorado and Wyoming have prevalence ranging from 20 to 40 percent. Preventing movement of infected deer and infected tissue into areas where CWD does not occur is the most powerful tool in the manager’s tool kit.

28 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

3) CWD IS NOT SPREADING RAPIDLY.

To the contrary, for a disease first detected in free-ranging deer in the 1980s with no natural vector such as an insect to spread it, CWD has spread remarkably fast. From an endemic area in northcentral Colorado and southeast Wyoming, the range of the disease increased over a 20-year period to the lake states, the Midwest, New Mexico, and central Canada. By 2005, the disease was present in the central Appalachians, and around 2010, the number of states in which CWD was detected grew dramatically. The disease has also been found outside of the United States, such as in South Korea and Norway. Some of the spread of the disease outside the endemic area is likely a result of natural deer and elk movements. Other occurrences are best explained by movement of CWD-positive elk or deer or their tissue. Again, the disease has spread remarkably fast, given what is known about its transmission. Responsible wildlife managers should strive to keep CWD from spreading into the herds they manage. 4) CWD CANNOT BE PREVENTED OR CONTROLLED, ONLY MONITORED.

Clearly, CWD can be prevented from infecting a population. Preventing movement of infected deer and infected tissue into areas where CWD does not occur is the most powerful tool in the manager’s tool kit. Once introduced, the options decline dramatically. Managers in New York detected two positive wild deer in the vicinity of an infected captive deer facility in an isolated CWD outbreak in 2005. Acting swiftly, deer managers in New York harvested deer heavily in the outbreak area, and CWD has not been detected in the area since. The case in New York appears unique because CWD was detected early. In most instances, the disease is more well established once detected and there are no viable options for eliminating it. The rate of spread and the rate at which prevalence increases may be slowed by reducing deer density, but the effectiveness of these approaches is still unclear. And, because they must be instituted for years or decades, these approaches may be opposed by groups who desire higher deer densities.

5) NO PEER-REVIEWED PAPER TO DATE CLEARLY SHOWS A CAUSE-AND-EFFECT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RECENT DEER DECLINES AND CWD.

This statement harkens back to the tobacco companies’ strategy of denying tobacco causes cancer and can shorten people’s lives. Cancer may have several causes and it may be difficult to conclude a given cancer is caused by tobacco use, but that does not mean tobacco is safe to use. To the contrary, the link between premature death and tobacco use is clear. Similarly, deer and elk herds may decline for many reasons, but scientists have techniques that allow them to isolate the cause of population declines. There are now three peer-reviewed studies demonstrating cause and effect relationship between deer declines and CWD. And the effects are not subtle. Population estimates were available for two of the populations, and those populations declined 40-50 percent over 10-20 years. Survival of CWD-negative deer in these studies was 30-40 percent greater than survival of CWD-positive deer (e.g., survival of CWD-negative deer—85 percent vs. CWD-positive deer—50 percent). Some deer populations have high enough reproductive rate to avoid declines, but many do not, especially in the semi-arid south and western Texas (see point 7). 6) CWD DOES NOT KILL DEER.

This statement is simply not true because wild and captive deer die of clinical CWD; the disease is always fatal. However, many CWD-positive deer do not die strictly from CWD, just as people positive for AIDS may not die from AIDS. Rather, AIDS-positive people often die of infections that their body could not defeat because AIDS had compromised their immune system. Similarly, deer in free-ranging populations may not die of CWD, but, as might

It is important to note that CWD is always fatal, is caused by a disease agent, can be spread from infected animals to healthy animals, and causes holes to form in the animal’s brain, resulting in the animal progressively losing its ability to avoid danger, eat food, and walk or function normally. FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 29

be expected of an animal with holes in its brain, these deer are susceptible to other factors. CWD-positive deer are more vulnerable to predators, hunters, and vehicle collisions. Deer with CWD may be less motivated to forage or forage less efficiently. Poor foraging ability makes these deer more susceptible to death during winter or other periods of stress. As an example of the impact of CWD on deer survival, whitetail deer in Wyoming that were positive for CWD, even if they did not show clinical symptoms, had a 40 percent chance of surviving one year, whereas deer without CWD in the same population had an 80 percent chance of surviving one year. These findings are especially meaningful because both the CWD-negative and CWDpositive deer were in the same area and exposed to the same threats of mortality. The only difference was that some had contracted CWD and others had not. 7) BECAUSE CWD TAKES 14 MONTHS TO 4 YEARS TO DEVELOP AND BECAUSE POPULATION GENERATION TIME IS 3.5 YEARS, THE VAST MAJORITY OF DEER NEVER LIVE LONG ENOUGH TO BE CLINICAL TO CWD. THEREFORE, CWD, BY ITS CLINICAL NATURE, CANNOT BE A FACTOR IN TEXAS DEER HERD MANAGEMENT, PRESENT OR FUTURE.

Deer managers in South Texas often alleviate the constraints of low fawn production by providing supplemental feed. Supplemental feed makes a huge difference, for example by doubling fawn production and therefore removing many of the concerns described in the preceding paragraph. However, providing supplemental feed is likely to turbo-charge the spread of CWD in a deer herd. For this reason, it would be wise to cease supplemental feeding if CWD may be present. One final problem with high mortality before deer turn 4-years of age is that antler size, a characteristic of interest to many deer hunters, increases with age through at least 5 years of age, and some bucks show their largest antlers at age 6 or more. An additional problem is that bucks also have higher prevalence of the disease than does. So, not only do deer populations decline with CWD but the number of mature bucks would decline even more dramatically. CWD will be a big problem for hunters who enjoy hunting trophy bucks. CONCLUSION

The mass of scientific information and expertise suggests that CWD is a disease we do not want in our deer populations. It has no positive effects and many known and potential negative impacts. In addition, the CDC recommends that hunters not consume meat from animals that test positive for CWD. For all these reasons, it makes sense to take actions to keep CWD from being introduced into deer populations without the disease. Future generations of hunters will thank us for doing all we can to keep CWD rare. n

This statement is rife with misunderstanding of the importance of adult survival in deer populations, especially The best offense against deer populations in semi-arid rangelands of Texas. Using South Texas as an example, about 30 CWD is a rock-solid percent of the adult deer are typically 6 years old or older in defense to keep CWD from sustainably harvested deer populations. The only way for this age structure to develop is for adult survival to be high. High being introduced into a adult survival is critical to persistence of deer populations in deer population. South Texas because fawn-to-doe ratios may average 30 fawns/100 does. This level of fawn production is low and reflects the challenging nutritional environment of South Texas, especially during drought. In fact, fawn production in South Texas is just sufficient to allow the deer population to grow at a slow rate and therefore to support a light recreational harvest. Contrary to the suggestion that there is no problem with deer dying before they reach 4-years of age, such high adult mortality would cause deer populations in South Texas to decline rapidly. To compound the problem of CWD for deer populations in South Texas, female deer rarely raise a fawn until does reach 3 years old. Even though they typically conceive for the first time as yearlings and give birth on their second birthday, autumn lactation rates and maternity determined using genetic techniques show that 2-year-old females rarely raise a fawn. For this reason, high mortality before 4-years of age from CWD would be a big problem for deer populations in South ÂŠ MARK GOCKE, W YOMING GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT. PUBLIC DOMAIN. Texas and likely elsewhere in the state. 30 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

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

DREAM BIGGER

THE VICTORY RF LASER RANGEFINDER IS BUILT FOR ABSOLUTE PRECISION WHEN IT MATTERS MOST. W H AT E V E R D R E A M H U N T I S N E X T O N Y O U R L I S T, S U C C E S S I S N O W W E L L- W I T H I N R A N G E. LEARN MORE AT WWW.ZEISS.COM/VICTORYRF

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 31

W. DAVID WALTER

GENETICS IN WHITETAIL DEER: IT’S ABOUT MORE THAN JUST LARGE ANTLERS

USGS, PENNSYLVANIA COOPERATIVE FISH AND WILDLIFE RESEARCH UNIT

When we think about genetics of

USDA PHOTO BY SCOT T BAUER

whitetail deer, we almost always think about the large-antlered buck we see walking by our tree stand. In fact, there is a booming business in the deer-farming industry to share genetic materials to breed those bucks that give the highest score. Over years or decades, mating these large-antlered bucks in captivity has resulted in deer farms having deer with antlers that we would never see in the wild deer we hunt. This form of breeding bucks for big antlers over many generations coincidently provides us with a useful tool for another type of deer research—landscape genetics of wild deer. The use of genetics in the deer farming industry is different than how we might use genetics to manage or understand the ecology of wild whitetail deer. Genetics have become even more important recently due to the wild deer interface with farmed deer as it relates to chronic wasting disease. PR MIM NG E R2 020 1 81 8 32 FA I R CH A S E | SSU

FIGURE 1. Relative relatedness of deer based on three subpopulation clusters in the Mid-Atlantic region based on genetic markers for over 2,000 whitetail deer sampled. The epicenter of chronic wasting disease in the region is in West Virginia where it was first detected in 2005. It is indicated on the map with a plus (+) symbol.

Chronic wasting disease (CWD) is what we call a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy that is characterized by abnormal deposits of the misfolded prion protein throughout the brain and central nervous system of infected cervids. It is similar to mad cow disease that infected European cattle and Creutzfeld-Jacobs disease in humans. While research suggested that CWD poses little risk to agriculturally important species (e.g. cattle) and human health, recent experimental infection of a primate species crab-eating macaque (Cynomolgus macaques) has raised concern of CWD overcoming the species barrier and posing a risk to human health in the future.

Genetics offers a few pathways of insight to understanding CWD as it pertains to movements of deer around the landscape and susceptibility to disease. MOVEMENTS

Deer behavior can facilitate disease spread, as dispersing males have been documented to move more than 100 kilometers and the tendency of females to remain in a local area can exacerbate direct transmission within family groups. Male dispersal distance was greater for deer in more open than forested landscapes (determined from deer equipped with satellite collars by researchers in Pennsylvania); however, limited information can be gleaned from studies

that require capturing and collaring deer. Genetics provides data collected over a broad geographic scaleâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;especially through collection of tissue samples provided by hunters or via other means that supply voluntary sampling. With this information, we would be able to map with considerable detail the landscape genetics of deer and not rely on capturing and monitoring deer with GPS technology. To this end, my colleagues and I initiated a study to see how chronic wasting disease could travel across a landscape after starting in an epicenter in West Virginia in 2005. We have collected tissue samples from hunters in the Mid-Atlantic region that includes Maryland,

Pennsylvania and Virginia to assess genetic markers called â&#x20AC;&#x153;microsatellitesâ&#x20AC;? for each deer. Combinations of these markers are unique to individual deer and are shared between family groups or will be shared by others when a male or female disperses and breeds with another subpopulation of deer. Using these markers, we can infer subpopulations of deer across a large area of the Mid-Atlantic based on relatedness of these subpopulations in the areas we received genetic samples. Landscape-level sharing of genetics can also provide insight on potential barriers to movement by deer across the region. This, in turn, can show us potential transmission pathways of disease FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 33

because not only is genetic material shared, but disease may be shared as well. As you can see, deer share genes across a large area in the region (Figure 1), although this is not surprising considering what we know about how far deer move across an area. There is some isolation of deer subpopulations as a result of highways, rivers, and high ridges in the region (Figure 2). Can we answer the question in this area about whether CWD was started in the more than 1,000 deerfarm operations in the region, or did it expand from the epicenter in West Virginia where it was first detected (Figure 1) in 2005? Stay tuned.

SUSCEPTIBILITY

Rare differences of the prion protein gene, called â&#x20AC;&#x153;polymorphisms,â&#x20AC;? have been investigated for their link to potential reduced susceptibility to CWD infection across the range of whitetail deer. The possibility that there is a less-susceptible genotype that shows a difference in infection rates when compared to deer with more susceptible genotypes requires further research. Any indication that genotype-based susceptibility is a potential factor affecting shedding of infective disease agents or increases the lifespan of the infected deer would be valuable information in our fight

against this disease. Several investigations on the proportions of the prion protein in whitetail deer that identified a predominant genotype was observed throughout North America (50â&#x20AC;&#x201C;87 percent). Understanding if there is a link between CWD susceptibility and particular genotypes of the prion protein gene would allow wildlife managers to develop more targeted mitigation strategies accounting for underlying genetic risk factors. Mitigating the effects of this disease is particularly important, given the economic, social, and ecological importance of whitetail deer. n

The use of genetics in the deer farming industry is different than how we might use genetics to manage or understand the ecology of wild whitetail deer. Genetics have become even more important recently due to the wild deer interface with farmed deer as it relates to chronic wasting disease. FIGURE 2. Percent of the most common PRNP genotype in whitetail deer for investigations indicating variability of this genotype across North America.

34 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 35

GET INVOLVED Previously only available in a newsletter, CSF is now pleased to offer a more interactive version of Tracking The Capitols, which allows you to search for specific legislation or regulations on issues—and in the states—that you are most interested in. This new service allows you to gain information at a time of your choosing, instead of waiting for the weekly newsletter, and also allows you to refine your search criteria to provide you with only the information you wish to see. CSF invites you to sign up for customized legislative and regulatory email alerts by clicking the “Sign up for email alerts” button at the top of the page. In so doing, you can self-select the states and issues that you are most interested in, and will receive an email alert sent to your inbox with timely updates on a schedule of your choosing (daily or weekly).

YOUR OPINION COUNTS - TAKE THE POLLS

CSF is interested in hearing your opinion on various sportsmens-related policy issues. There is a section containing the current poll, as well as results of polls that have been conducted previously. CURRENT POLL - Which of the following conservation programs do you feel is the most important as Congress seeks to reauthorize the Farm Bill in 2018?

36 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 37

BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB CONGRATULATES CONGRESS ON PASSAGE OF SPORTSMEN’S LEGISLATION PACKAGE MARCH 26, 2018

Read more press releases to find out what your Club is focused on and delivering at www.Boone-Crockett.org.

THE GOOD NEIGHBOR AUTHORITY IMPROVEMENT ACT

The Good Neighbor Authority Improvement Act will strengthen the Forest Service’s ability to partner with states on forest health projects to improve forest habitat for big game, game birds, and other wildlife. The legislation improves the original Good Neighbor Authority enacted in the 2014 Farm Bill, which allows states to speed projects from planning to execution, better fund the process, and strengthen collaborative support for beneficial and necessary projects that continually face the threat of being bogged down in litigation. “The Good Neighbor Authority Improvement Act will allow states to work on a broader array of projects to create healthier forests. This is good for the health and vitality of our federal forest public lands, our water quality, the wildlife living there, and everyone who relies on these lands for outdoor recreation.” said Ben B. Hollingsworth Jr., president of the Boone and Crockett Club.

38 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

The Boone and Crockett Club applauds the signing in to law of an Omnibus Appropriations Bill that had bipartisan inclusions of forest management reforms and a fix to the wildfire-funding shortfall that has been plaguing the U.S. Forest Service. Although the provisions have been labeled as a Sportsmen’s Package, the Boone and Crockett Club points out these provisions benefit all citizens. “The history of the conservation movement is highlighted with taking action where and when necessary,” said Ben B. Hollingsworth Jr., president of the Boone and Crockett Club. “When you value wild places, wild things and the opportunity to enjoy them, you fix the problems that need fixing.” The appropriations bill includes several funding priorities that address the declining health of national forests. One sets aside $2 billion for fire suppression. The recent increase in catastrophic wildfires have forced the U.S. Forest Service to divert crippling amounts of its annual budget to suppressing fires rather than fulfilling its duties of forest management and fire prevention. Another measure improves the vitality of federal forests by strengthening the Good Neighbor Authority Improvement Act, which is an existing cooperative agreement between states and the Forest Service to work together on forest management projects. The fix removes the barriers and allows this policy to reach its full potential. “The majority of people, including sportsmen, view our national forests as treasured lands in which to recreate and reconnect with nature,” Hollingsworth Jr. explained. “For a host of reasons our forests have fallen into unhealthy condition affecting water quality and wildlife, and fueling fires that are burning longer, hotter and risking lives and property.” Forest health is not the only problem being solved by the new funding package. It includes permanent reauthorization of the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA). The Act allows the Bureau of Land Management to make strategic sales of land that have lower conservation and public access values in order to provide funding for other lands that do have higher value to the people. “I know our team in Washington has worked tirelessly on these issues for years, and so have a lot of our conservation partners,” Hollingsworth Jr. concluded. “This appropriations bill will deliver real solutions for improving our public land national forests, which over time will enhance forest habitat that is vital to big game. See the problem, fix the problem is how conservation should work and our Congressional leadership did just that.” n

“See the problem, fix the problem is how conservation should work and our Congressional leadership did just that.”

29 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 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

FAIRCHASE CHASE| |SSUM FAIR P RI NMGE2R02170 1 839 39

IS WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT SCIENCE-BASED? A pillar of wildlife management in North America is the notion that it is science-based or science-driven. Indeed, Aldo Leopold, the father of wildlife management, laid the groundwork for this in his 1933 textbook titled Game Management. Leopold hearkened back to what he termed the “Roosevelt Doctrine,” the legacy of Theodore Roosevelt, and articulated one of the elements of that doctrine as “science is the proper tool to discharge wildlife policy.” This was captured verbatim in the retrospective reconstruction of the key principles and legal underpinnings that make wildlife conservation in the United States and Canada unique from the rest of the world known as the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation (the Model), first put forward by B&C Professional Member Dr. Valerius Geist. Many have questioned the wording of the phrase “science is the proper tool to discharge wildlife policy” because it seems to flow awkwardly off one’s lips. Others have questioned whether its meaning truly is representative of how the science-policy interface really works in wildlife management, suggesting it implies science dictates policy, when in fact science is one of many contributing factors decisionmakers consider when developing policy. The latter perspective is closest to reality, and was the intent behind the Model’s assertion, as evidenced in writings by Geist and others, including 40 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

this author. A more accurate statement would be “wildlife policy is informed by science.” My colleague, Dr. Dan Decker of Cornell University and co-author of the Technical Review of the North American Model published by The Wildlife Society and the Club, recently breathed some fresh air into the intent behind the original wording. Most readers get caught up over what is meant by “discharge wildlife policy.” Some believe it means policy should be based on science, period, while others say it was an awkward way of saying wildlife policy should be informed by science. Dan pondered how two smart, really articulate, clear-writing people like TR and Leopold could have used a word that causes such consternation. Then it hit him. Discharge of policy means: After you’ve established wildlife policy (which is created with ingredients from science and values and professional judgment and politics), then the work of wildlife management—choosing specific technical alternatives and taking actions— should be guided by best available science. I would hope that students, scholars, and conservationists can appreciate the original wording as being more than paying homage to the two arguably most central figures in the North American wildlife conservation movement—they had it right all along! Recently an article was published in a mainstream science publication that challenged the notion that wildlife management in the United

SCIENCE BLASTS

States and Canada is guided by science. The authors base their assertion on their evaluation of whether state and provincial management plans meet criteria set forth in four “hallmarks” they developed: measurable objectives; evidence; transparency; and independent review. They conclude that there is limited support for the assumption that wildlife management in North America is guided by science. Prior to this paper’s release I was provided an embargoed copy of the manuscript by a magazine titled The Scientist and asked to comment on it. I was quite interested, because the program I oversee works very closely with state fish and wildlife and federal agencies to help them address their science needs. USGS has around 100 fish and wildlife Coop Unit scientists embedded in the graduate faculty at state landgrant universities whose jobs are to conduct research to address the needs of state and federal natural resource agencies. They also train agency biologists in new science developments and develop the workforce of the future through graduate education

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

that connects students with agency biologists (see Fair Chase Winter 2014), in addition to scores of others at ecosystem science centers across the country. With a current portfolio of over 600 Coop Unit research projects with agencies, I have some knowledge of the science employed in management. As you can imagine, I was concerned with the authors’ conclusion. My concern grew deeper when I looked at the methodology and underlying assumptions. The authors enlisted one informed non-specialist to search agency websites for all available management-relevant information, such as wildlife management plans. They also sent emails to agency contacts they found on websites and posed questions related to these hallmarks. Based on information derived from these two approaches, they conclude there is limited support that wildlife management is guided by science in the United States and Canada.

An important role of wildlife scientists and managers is to communicate the science in a manner that will resonate with policymakers while maintaining legitimacy as honest brokers of scientific information and insight.

I have major concerns with this paper and its findings. A typical wildlife management system consists of several components, including: (1) problem identification, such as can the population sustain a hunt, and to what magnitude, as well as the desires, values, and beliefs of the stakeholders and beneficiaries; (2) procurement of knowledge through original research or synthesis of existing science; (3) analysis and evaluation of the knowledge relative to the problem or issue; (4) development of management recommendations to policymakers; (5) development of policy, such as season and bag limits; (6) implementation of policy, which is management as put forth in management plans; and 7) collection of data after implementation to evaluate the results, improve the science base, and refine the policy recommendations.

©NORM MIDTLYNG, USGS. PUBLIC DOMAIN.

The science component of this management cycle is contained within elements 1, 2, 3, and 7, although if decision science is employed, it can be contained within elements 4 and 5. The authors sampled element 6, the one element where science is not asserted explicitly, but is guided by. The email letters sent to agencies asked the recipients, who may or may not have been the proper addressees, whether their categorization of hunt management based on their criteria were accurate. The letter did not once mention the word “science.” Did the recipients really understand what they were being asked? One might argue that the authors themselves were not transparent and honest with agency staff about the purpose and aims of their study in the emails that were sent! The authors’ conclusions noted, not surprisingly, that greater science was afforded to big game species. One would expect greater investment in science would be granted to those species, such as elk and bighorn sheep, that have greater harvest pressure relative to population size than species such as eastern cottontails and the eastern gray squirrel. Yet, this is not reflected in the authors’ conclusions. The one conclusion I can draw from this paper is that the authors do not understand wildlife management and where science fits within the management

cycle. Decision-makers at the state, provincial, and federal levels incorporate many sources of information into policy development that ultimately goes forward as management. This includes science (biological and social), economics, direct stakeholder input, political input, and other sources. The degree to which science inf luences policy is dependent upon many factors, including the perceived relevance, credibility, and legitimacy of the science by the policymakers, the contentiousness of the policy issue at hand, and the perceived risks inherent in their decision. An important role of wildlife scientists and managers is to communicate the science in a manner that will resonate with policymakers while maintaining legitimacy as honest brokers of scientific information and insight. So what do we make of this recent paper and the authors’ conclusions? They failed to make their case because they confuse the decision process with the science process, and their methods were inappropriate for answering the question they posed. Yet, the authors may have piqued awareness of the role of science in wildlife management, albeit in a flawed way. It reminds us that science is integral to wildlife management, and we must be vigilant in ensuring that science remains a strong component of agency portfolios. Roosevelt and Leopold had it right, even if it twists our tongues a bit. n

The Boone and Crockett Club asks that you please thank our Trailblazers with your patronage. FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 41

BOONE AND CROCKETT’S MOST UP-TO-DATE RECORDS BOOK

Records of North American Big Game Now Available in a Paperback Edition for as low as $64!

hese one-of-a-kind records books live up to their long-standing reputation with more than 32,000 big game listings, hundreds of color photos and intriguing chapters. In its fourteenth edition since the original book was published by B&C in 1932, this latest edition has grown to over 900 pages split between two volumes. Each book is coffee-table quality with full-color printing throughout. Don’t miss out on the opportunity to own this incredible book, order your set today! Available in three different options, while supplies last!

PAPER BACK SETS

H AR DCOV ER SETS

DELU X E SETS

REGULAR PRICE: $80

REGULAR PRICE: $200

NO DISCOUNTS

Only $64 for B&C Associates!

B&C Associates pay $160!

Regular Price $400

Now Available

Limited Quantity Available

SOLD OUT!!!

Same contents as other editions, only difference is the paperback binding.

While supplies last, only a handful remain. Includes a custom slipcase.

Limited to 25 copies. Bound in leather and marble paper, signed and numbered.

Make it easy...Use the camera on your smart phone to scan these QR codes and order online in a snap! 42 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Don’t want to order online? No worries! Call us toll-free at 888-840-4868. Visit www.boone-crockett.org/recordsbook for more information.

SHOP BOONE AND CROCKETT Visit www.boone-crockett.org to view our complete collection of books and merchandise.

Great gifts for dads and grads! Order Today! HUNT FAIR CHASE DECALS Show off these B&C window decals on your car, gun case, or wherever people will see it. These custom-cut transparent vinyl stickers are available for whitetail deer, mule deer, elk or sheep and are extremely durable for all weather conditions. They measure 3-3/4 inches wide.

HUNT FAIR CHASE CAP

Heather Grey, flex fit,available in S/M AHOHFC | $29.95

SALE PRICE $20.00

DECWT | $5

B&C YETI RAMBLER

20 oz, includes lid YETIRAM | $39.95 | ASSOCIATES $31.95

FAIR CHASE HUNTER DECAL FCHD | $10 | NO DISCOUNT

B&C 1887 HAT - GRAY AND WHITE Adjustable strap AHGW | $25 | ASSOCIATES $20

DECMD | $5

DECSH | $5

B&C 1887 LAPEL PIN

ALP1887 | $12.50 | ASSOCIATES $10

DECEK | $5

Call Toll-Free 888/840-4868 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

SOLD INDIVIDUALLY FOR $5 EACH OR A SET OF FOUR | DECALL | $15 FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 43

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.

FROM:

Mississippi State University MISSISSIPPI STATE WILDLIFE PROGRAM

MISSISSIPPI STATE BOONE AND CROCKETT FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM

The Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture at Mississippi State University is dedicated to ensuring that future generations enjoy wildlife and fisheries in their natural habitats. To meet this goal, the department is focused on training future wildlife and fisheries professionals, conducting regional, national and international research, and providing educational outreach for citizens and landowners. Mississippi State’s wildlife faculty are some of the country’s leading biologists, developing scientifically-based, adaptive and proactive conservation planning to benefit applied management of wildlife and fisheries. Students are engaged with faculty in developing new methods for wildlife management and restoration through hands-on experiential learning. The Department has a number of specialized research laboratories and centers that support its focal areas, which include spatial and quantitative ecology, carnivore ecology, human-wildlife conflicts and conservation biology. Mississippi State also benefits from integrated partnerships with the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USDA-APHIS Wildlife Services and the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks.

The Boone and Crockett Fellowship program is reaching its fourth term at Mississippi State University. Over the past three years, the program’s influence at Mississippi State has facilitated the education, training and professional development of our nation’s future conservation leaders through culturing academic excellence and professional integrity. Throughout the program’s presence at Mississippi State, it has been under the direction and council of Dr. Bruce Leopold (Professional Member), Dr. Bronson Strickland – Extension Professor, James L. Cummins (Regular Member) – Executive Director of Wildlife Mississippi, and now under the leadership of Dr. Andy Kouba – Department Head of Wildlife, Fisheries & Aquaculture, College of Forest Resources, all of whom maintain active roles in culturing the program at Mississippi State.

44 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

BOONE AND CROCKETT FELLOW PROFILE

Andrew Smith of Greenville, Mississippi, a small town in the Mississippi River Delta, is a passionate conservationist who enjoys writing, history, traditional archery, and fly-fishing. He received his B.S. in Wildlife and Fisheries Science from Mississippi State University in 2014 where he worked as an ecological technician on a variety of projects with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, and others. After graduation, Mr. Smith began to seek out his interests in biological invasions and natural resources/conservation policy, where he was then recruited by Dr. Leopold and the Boone and Crockett Club to investigate the effectiveness of policy and legislation to control wild pig populations in the United States. Mr. Smith is a full-time Extension Associate for Mississippi State’s Center for Resolving Human-Wildlife Conflicts, where he provides programmatic support to the director, writing and publishing on key invasive species of Mississippi, the southeast, and the U.S. During this time he has worked closely with species such as Asian carp and wild pigs on a variety of projects with the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, & Parks, and the U.S. Geological Survey.

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 45

Â©DONALD M. JONES

46 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

A message brought to you by

“When some of my friends have asked me anxiously about their boys, whether they should let them hunt,

I have answered yes–

remembering that it was one of the best parts of my education– MAKE THEM HUNTERS.”

- HENRY DAVID THOREAU

One of my favorite aspects of hunting in remote parts of Alaska is the separation from modern life and the perspective it always instills. Looking back on what I learned about life on the island while on this trip, I marvel at the resilience and resourcefulness of the Cup’ig ancestors who had to live a subsistence lifestyle on an island with no wood, and at the time, no big game (currently there are muskox and reindeer, but both were introduced by the government in the 20th century). PG. 50 PREHISTORIC PURSUITS BY JOHN WHIPPLE

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 47

Aldo Leopold reminds us, “Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching—even when doing the wrong thing is legal.”

Join the conversation, read other comments and learn more at www.huntfairchase.com

#HuntRight

Proudly Supported By:

48 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

REFEREES

While the NFL is back at the drawing board trying to decide what is and is not a catch, and other professional sports leagues continue to make tweaks to their refereeing system and booth-review processes, it makes one wonder if hunting has had it right all along: We police ourselves and call our own shots. While hunting is not an organized, competitive team spectator sport, hunting can draw some parallels along with some important differences. Participant rules for organized sports are akin to our hunting laws and regulations. Referees and umpires consist of game commissioners and wildlife officers. Yet, the rest of the rules in hunting are either self-defined, those established by a group to which we belong or those set forth by a respected name like Boone and Crockett Club. To be fair, hunting is not a field or a team sport like traditional sports, or a competition with other hunters. It does not come with a list of participant rules that need enforcement administered by impartial referees or umpires to keep the play safe, fair, within the rules, and on time. A group of friends who share a hunting lease may decide everyone must shoot a doe before taking their buck, or that bucks under 2½ years are off-limits. If you break one of these rules, you might be looking for another place to hunt next year or find yourself

digging the new outhouse. On the personal side, we have our own standards by which we live and hunt. These are not written down and handed to someone with instructions. It’s more like, “Watch me and see how I do.” We referee ourselves. It’s one of the special aspects of hunting. We’re the ones who pack home the memories and the meat. We are the ones who reap the rewards of a good decision and a good chase. We’re also the ones that live with the consequences of taking a shortcut or making a bad call. Of all the things we take into the field, the most important thing is our own attitude and approach. That’s because fair chase is defined by values we believe in and are committed to upholding. The biggest difference between traditional sports participants and hunters is what the great conservationist Aldo Leopold reminds us, “Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching—even when doing the wrong thing is legal.” Leopold also made the point that, in the field, you are your own referee. There is no one else to “call the shot.” At the end of the day, the measure of the hunt is a measure of oneself. If we think about it, this is true in everything we do. In hunting, getting our game is the purpose, but not the only purpose. If this is true, filling our tag is a measure of success, but not the only one. If it were

the only measure, we would be disappointed most times and likely find something else to do. Let’s be honest. How much of the hunting experience is thinking about going hunting, practicing, honing skills and preparing? How much of it is the chess match we play with the game we pursue—the strategies, the physical and mental effort, the uncomfortable conditions, and the challenges overcome? The answer is all of it. One of the many benefits about hunting is that it teaches and never stops teaching. It forces us to learn, prepare, acquire skills, and solve problems. In other words, it teaches life skills like decision-making, accountability, self-control, determination and self-reliance. These are all character traits we can pick up in other ways, but hunting teaches us the whole lot in one lump. These life skills are something that is always conveniently left out when hunting is criticized, or branded as just killing. Why is that? With or without someone watching, it is human nature to do what we personally feel good about, and to not repeat doing those things we do not feel good about. It is never a good feeling to have to end an animal’s suffering because of a poor choice we made in forcing a risky shot. As legendary bowhunter and

bowhunting advocate Fred Bear once said, “Be sure of your shot. Nothing is more expensive than regret.” We hunt for many reasons, including the enjoyment and the memories. A fairchase approach ensures “no regrets.” It also ensures that we never feel the need to strategically leave out parts of the story of a hunt when telling others, or block out the same when reliving the experience ourselves. At the end of the day, hunting is better served by sticking to no referees and policing ourselves. Yes, there rightfully should be a standard like fair chase that sets the tone, and thankfully, responsible hunters follow this tenet. Past this, if we pile on more rules, we risk being able to maintain any credible claim that hunting is done by principled men and women who hold themselves accountable to a code of ethics that extends beyond the law. There are not too many things people do that can make this claim. n

Hunt Right

HUNT FAIR CHASE FAIRCH CHASE SUMMMEERR2 2001 81 8 49 FAIR ASE | |SUM

PREHISTORIC

JOHN GLASSING FOR MUSK OX. 50 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

JOHN WHIPPLE 60TH PARALLEL ADVENTURES PHOTOS COURTESY OF MICAH NESS AND JOHN WHIPPLE

PURSUITS MUSK OX HUNTING IN ALASKA: A CONSERVATION SUCCESS STORY

Even among hunters, bringing up

the topic of musk ox in conversation is often met with a funny look followed by a lot of questions like “Are those the furry buffalo?” “I thought they were only in Canada?” “What do they taste like?” “How big are they?” “Wait, the cows have horns too?”

Now in the spirit of full disclosure, prior to 2013 I knew little about these prehistoric looking creatures myself other than that they existed in remote regions of Alaska and that even as a resident the chances of drawing a tag to hunt them was well below 1 percent. To my great surprise in February of 2013 my hunting partner Casey Dinkel and I found ourselves among that 1 percent, having drawn a party tag to hunt bull musk ox on Nunivak Island! With the hunt exactly one year away and our excitement already mounting, we began to study up on this intriguing animal and its habitat. Measuring 1,632 square miles, Nunivak Island is the eighth-biggest island in the US. Located in the Bering Sea some 30 miles from the western coast of Alaska, one could say it meets the definition of remote. The landscape is treeless, windswept, and locked in an icy grip for most of the year. Not many living things choose to call this island home, but it is here that musk ox have thrived for the better part of a century, playing out one of Alaska’s great wildlife reintroduction and conservation success stories. FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 51

THE MEKORYUK “AIRPORT”.

JOHN BUTCHERS MEAT IN THE ENTRYWAY OF THEIR HOSTS HOME.

While musk ox have always been native to Alaska, evidence having been found going back as far as the Pleistocene era, in the 1800s unchecked hunting pressure wiped them out. In 1930, 34 musk ox were transferred with great difficulty from Greenland to Nunivak. The effort paid off and the small herd took root, and under effective management was able to flourish. In 1968 the herd had grown to 750 animals, so the excess stock were transplanted throughout different portions of Alaska and Russia (ADF&G). Today the state population numbers in the thousands, and the population on Nunivak is maintained between about 500 to 550 animals, which is considered the optimal sustainable population size for the island. Since 1975, the Department of Fish and Game has used a highly regulated hunting program to help keep the population on Nunivak stable. About 40 tags are raffled off each year and are available to anyone who wishes to enter. With only 40 tags and about 3,000-4,000 folks applying for them, the draw odds are mighty low, making this a rare

and very coveted tag, and an incredibly unique experience for those lucky enough to draw it. An industry of guiding and transport has risen around this hunt, providing a significant amount of income to the 200 or so people of Mekoryuk, the one small village on the island. Members of the Cup’ig eskimos, many of Mekoryuk’s inhabitants have lived on the island their whole lives, as their ancestors have done for generations before them. One of my favorite aspects of hunting in remote parts of Alaska is the separation from modern life and the perspective it always instills. Looking back on what I learned about life on the island while on this trip, I marvel at the resilience and resourcefulness that the Cup’ig ancestors must have had to live a subsistence lifestyle on an island with no wood, and at the time, no big game (currently there are musk ox and reindeer, but both were introduced by the government in the 20th century). They lived in underground homes dug in to the tundra and survived by fishing, seal hunting, and gathering what they could from the land. Perspective indeed.

NIGHT FALLS OVER THE VILLAGE OF MEKORYUK.

52 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

The next step was to ask around and find the best local transporters, and we finally settled on James Whitman. Having grown up on the island, James knows it like the proverbial back of his hand and has hunted musk ox his whole life. James is registered as both a guide and a transporter, the distinction being that in the role of transporter he provides the client room and board and transport via snowmachine to and from the field, but does not assist in the actual hunting or processing of game as he does when hired as a guide. In our case, he would be filling the transporter role, and assisting him would be another life-long resident, Raymond, who also had a lifetime of musk ox hunting experience. It was actually with him that we would be staying, and Raymond proved to be the most gracious of hosts. After booking with James, we began to spend quite a bit of time studying the qualities of a mature bull as he explained that for the uninitiated, musk ox can be somewhat difficult to judge. Both cows and bulls have horns, and young bulls can look very much like mature cows. Trophy class bulls

are characterized by heavy bosses much like a Cape buffalo, and have long, low, forward curving ivory colored horns with black tips. THE HUNT

Our boots landed with a crunch on the packed snow of the Nunivak Island airstrip. Our group numbered three, as in addition to my hunting buddy Casey and myself, our friend and photographer Micah Ness was accompanying us in the role of cameraman. As I looked around at the featureless white landscape that stretched out in every direction, my excitement for what was to come began to mount. The needle on the thermometer hovered around zero as we loaded our gear from the plane to the snowmachines and made our way in to town. As with so many runways in rural Alaska, it is located outside of town (in this case about two miles), and is just a strip of snow-covered asphalt that serves to reinforce the feeling that one is really, truly, in the middle of nowhere. Or, just the sort of somewhere we would like to be. Upon arriving at James’s house, we were greeted by another hunter in the

arctic entryway of the house as he caped a musk ox he had harvested the day before. A good sign of things to come, we hoped. That night, over a meal of musk ox ribs we swapped hunting stories with our new-found friends and began to prepare with anticipation for the hunt that would begin in the morning. We woke unnecessarily early, brimming with firstday excitement that was quickly tempered by our hosts. With the mentality of islanders the world over they were in no particular hurry, secure in the knowledge that the musk ox weren’t going anywhere. We ate a leisurely breakfast, and were on the snow machines and moving out by about 11 o’ clock. We travelled a good 40 miles, periodically stopping to glass for the black spots that would stand out starkly against the sea of white. Sure enough, at mid-afternoon we spotted a herd of about a dozen musk ox. As Casey was hunting with a bow, we had decided he would be the first one “up to bat”. We disembarked from the snowmachines and began to make a plan of attack. Consistent with most

of the island this area was flat and featureless and approach without detection would be difficult. We selected a route that followed a small contour in the land with an occasional piece of brush that offered a modicum of cover. The last 200 yards were done on hands and knees, careful to only move when the many watchful eyes of the herd were not cast in our direction. An arctic fox scampered past us, chasing some ptarmigan that had taken refuge in the thin line of brush. The herd was a cross-section of bulls, cows, and calves but there was one bull in particular with a nice set of headgear and a great big mane of loose wool that set him apart from the rest. At 80 yards, our cover ran out and we were forced to try a painstaking belly crawl, trusting only to our white camouflage over-suits. At 60 yards our target bull had enough of our efforts, got up with a snort and galloped off! The rest of the herd followed in his wake. Thankfully, they only ran about a quarter mile away, presenting us with a chance at redemption. Stealth having failed, this time we took a bolder approach, splitting up and

WITH SUCH OPEN TERRAIN, IT IS DIFFICULT TO STALK THESE ANIMALS UNSEEN. HERE A MUSK OX HERD FLEES ACROSS THE TUNDRA

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 53

A LOCAL ELDER DEMONSTRATES HIS TECHNIQUE FOR HARPOONING SEALS. JOHN ADMIRES HIS MUSK OX

walking straight towards the herd, each from different angles in pincer fashion. Their prehistoric defense instincts engaged, they grouped in to a circle, with the bulls tossing their heads and stomping the ground in a show of defiance. As we approached, the lead bull made as if to charge several times, but Casey kept inching closer. At 35 yards, he held his bow at full draw, waiting for an opportunity. As with any herd animal, the difficulty is often in finding a clean shot that does not risk injuring a non-target animal, in this case made all the more difficult by the 30 mph gusts that had been our constant companion throughout the day. The lead bull became impatient and turned to take off running again, leaving the protection of the circle, and providing the opportunity that Casey needed. Casey put the arrow right through its heart, and the bull made it less than 50 yards before toppling over. Ecstatic, we admired the mature bullâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s thick pre-historic coat of fur and its great sweeping horns. Congratulations are necessarily short-lived in the arctic, and we soon set to work breaking down the animal before it

began to stiffen with cold. The smell of our work began to bring in hungry fox looking for an easy meal, and Casey was able to shoot a nice red that came a little too close for its own good. The trip back to the village was made in the dark with a wind that increased in ferocity throughout the night and by morning had turned in to a full-fledged storm. We spent the next two days in town butchering meat and walking around, meeting some of the other locals while we waited for the storm to break. One of the highlights of the trip was when we got to speak to an elder of the town who showed us his workshop, where he carved beautiful jewelry from musk ox horn and mastodon bone that he had found. He also took the time to tell us about his traditional method of hunting seals, demonstrating his technique in his kitchen with his well-worn harpoon. On the fourth day the storm broke and now it was my turn to try and fill a tag. The sky was a piercing blue and the temperature hovered around minus 10 as we left the village, but the wind had mercifully relented to a relatively mild 10 mph. By

CASEY, ABOUT TO TAKE THE SHOT.

54 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

mid-afternoon we had covered 30 miles and all we had seen were one reindeer and two fox, but then we crested a low hill below which opened a large plain. Lo and behold, a band of musk ox was feeding about a mile and a half distance from us. We got a little closer on the snow machines and then prepared for the stalk. I unlimbered my rifle from the cargo sled, my trusty Remington .375 H&H, perhaps a little overkill for this hunt, but a great all-around Alaskan big game gun. We figured we could approach within a couple hundred yards and be far enough away to not alarm the animals. We got off the machines and made our approach. Several times I stopped to glass the herd, and was able to pick out at least three bulls that were bigger than anything we had seen. At 150 yards we stopped and I settled into my shooting sticks. The bull I had selected was standing out in the open with several other bulls, and they seemed to be on the alert. When he turned and presented a clean broadside opportunity, I lined up for a shot, but made the error of not accounting for how long a musk oxâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s fur is and judged the

vitals to be higher than they actually were. The first shot struck too high, missing the vitals. The bull took off as did the rest of the herd, but it was unable to keep up. In a flurry of follow up shots, I was finally able to put the old bull to rest. He turned out to be a beautiful example of the species, with heavy bosses and mass that carried through to the characteristic beautiful black tips. He would later officially score 105-1/8. Caping and butchering these animals is a unique experience, as the hide and meat begins to freeze as soon as it is pulled away from the body, so one must be sure to move quickly and efficiently, and when done to pack

the hide and meat in the sled the way you want it to be shipped, because by the time you get back to the village it might be frozen solid. As we made the ride back to the village, the last golden rays of sunlight stretched across the ice and snow, while I was replaying in my head all the new experiences we had enjoyed over the last week. Musk ox hunting in Alaska is a unique experience, defined by the terrain and the people that inhabit it as much as it is by the animal itself. Providing that proper management continues, it looks like people will be able to enjoy this experience for many years to come. n

For more information on musk ox, visit the Alaska Department of Fish and Game website at adfg.alaska.gov. John Whipple is a hunter, photographer, and author based in Palmer, Alaska. He operates 60th Parallel Adventures with co-owner Casey Dinkel and specializes in filming and photographing outdoor adventures.

THE WHOLE TEAM FROM LEFT TO RIGHT; MICAH NESS, JOHN WHIPPLE, AND CASEY DINKEL WITH HIS BULL.

DRESSING OUT ANIMALS IN SUB-ZERO TEMPERATURES IS A GAME OF SPEED.

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 55

WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE HONORED BY BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB APRIL 05, 2018

The Wildlife Management Institute (WMI) is the recipient of the Boone and Crockett Club’s fourth Conservation and Stewardship Award. The award is given annually to the organization or entity that best exemplifies excellence in conservation and wildlife and land stewardship—core values of the Boone and Crockett Club and its founder, Theodore Roosevelt. The Institute’s president, Steve Williams, was also recognized at a dinner hosted by the Club in Norfolk, Virginia, as part of the 83rd North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference. WMI was established in 1911 by a coalition of conservationists, including a number of Boone and Crockett Club members, who were gravely concerned about dramatic declines in many wildlife populations. These American sportsmen and businessmen saw a need for an independent, scientific voice dedicated to restoring and ensuring wild populations and their habitats. Today, WMI continues to meet this challenge, advancing both the profession of wildlife management and the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. “The Wildlife Management Institute is the reservoir which feeds one of the seven principles of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation,” said Tom Price, co-chairman of the Club’s Habitat and Multiple Use/Sharing Committee. “This principle being, wildlife is to be managed by science. Our founder, Theodore Roosevelt, insisted that wildlife be managed by the best science available, not opinion or conjecture. WMI has been the conservation and wildlife management community’s go-to source for the best science for over a century. It’s time they were recognized for their tireless effort in supplying real science for real solutions.” The Club’s Conservation and Stewardship Award is presented to the individual or organization that best exemplifies the core values of the Boone and Crockett Club and its founder, Theodore Roosevelt: Conservation—acts of guarding, protecting, developing, and using natural resources wisely and sustainably, and Stewardship—planning for and managing natural resources responsibly. “On behalf of all the WMI staff, past and present, I thank the Boone and Crockett Club for this very significant award,” said Steve Williams. “WMI’s history has been intertwined with the Club for more than a century. It was a distinct honor for WMI to be recognized for embodying the core values of the prestigious Boone and Crockett Club.” n

LEFT TO RIGHT: B&C President Ben B. Hollingsworth, Jr., Steve Williams, Beth Williams, and Co-Chairman of B&C’s Habitat and Multiple Use/Sharing Committee James F. Bullock, Jr.

CONSERVATION AND STEWARDSHIP AWARD WINNERS 2015 - THE STARKEY PROJECT

Established in 1989 by the U.S. Forest Service,it is one of the most comprehensive field research programs in history. Research trials in an enclosed 25,000-acre working landscape measure the effects of timber management, livestock grazing and recreation on elk and deer populations. Results help guide resource-management decisions across the West. 56 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

2016 - THE CAESAR KLEBERG WILDLIFE RESEARCH INSTITUTE

The Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute was founded at Texas A&M University -Kingsville in 1981 by the Caesar Kleberg Foundation for Wildlife Conservation. During the past 35 years, CKWRI has grown to become the leading wildlife research organization in Texas and one of the best university wildlife research programs in the nation.

2017 - BOB MUNSON AND CHARLIE DECKER, CO-FOUNDERS — ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK FOUNDATION

RMEF was founded in 1984 in Montana with the mission to protect and enhance America’s most vital elk country and promote stewardship that benefits a wide range of wildlife. The conservation group has helped conserve 7.1 million acres and completed more than 10,000 conservation, education and hunting heritage projects across 49 states and eight provinces.

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 57

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

If there’s no chase, is the hunt still fair? A few years ago I published an article in

Fair Chase titled, “I’ve Walked the Line…Have You?” (Summer 2007). In that article, I provided figures on the slippery slope of gravitating from being a true hunter to being just a shooter, giving the animal little or no chance of escape. I also talked about the domestication of wild animals, comparing the domestication of sheep and cattle to what some often now call “wild” deer, but which are raised on deer farms. Well, it’s time for a recap.

Log into the Associate’s Community to read Robert D. Brown’s article, as well as archived articles dating back to 1994.

58 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Times have changed a bit, and we now have some new technology. But have our ethics changed? Not long ago I was talking with some non-hunting—but not anti-hunting —friends, and one of them decried hunting from blinds and tree stands. They said that was just “ambush hunting” and required no skill. I thought about that afterward, and to some extent, I had to agree. Yes, you have to know where to place the stand or blind, and in all honesty, it’s not that different from the still-hunting I did as a kid in northern California. But, after hunting for many years from a ground blind near a corn feeder in Texas, I’d gotten bored with the lack of challenge and the predictability of success. I took my sons with me at times, but tried to explain this really wasn’t real “hunting.” Was I right or wrong? There was no chase, but was ambushing “fair”? Later I was invited on a moose hunt in British Columbia with my 75-year-old uncle. Over the years, he had taken 30 moose in that area and as many elk. My three-day hunt with two teenage guides (their first guided hunt), backpacking in, living in pup tents, wading through a muskeg swamp at night, and the challenges of getting the head and meat out and back to base camp would make a story in itself. To me, that was a real “hunt.” But were my earlier hunts from stands and blinds not real hunts? As a caveat to this article on hunting ethics, I have to admit that, at times I’ve hunted behind high fences (though they were 10,000 acres or more), over bait, and with a dog. Like most of you, I learned to hunt from my dad, and my fondest memories of my youth are from hunting deer, ducks and pheasants with my father, grandfather and uncle in northern California. The Coastal Range and the Sierras can both be rugged country, and we used a dog for tracking our harvested deer. In fact, my first buck at an age of about 14-15 was a B&C book-quality blacktail.

I remember years ago when I was head of the Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences Department at Texas A&M, I would give lectures FIGURE 1. ASPECTS GIVING HUNTERS to the freshmen wildlife THE ADVANTAGE majors. They were about OVER THE HUNTED half men and half women, and about half hunters Baiting with salt or molasses and half non-hunters. Bows with laser sights Camouflage clothes Some of the boys Compound bows did not hunt, Corn feeders while some of Food plots the girls did. I Doe urine found no anDrones for scouting Grunts/Calls ti-hunters, but High-powered rifles again, this was Hunting inside high fences Texas A&M! As Hunting with dogs part of my lecture, Listening devices I made a graph like Range finders Remote live TV in Figure 1, listing the Telescopic sights potential advantages Trail cameras hunters could have over Tree stands/Blinds their prey. I prioritized the techniques, as I did in my 2007 article, and which I don’t do here. I asked their opinions about each technique, and none of the students seemed to have a problem with wearing camo or using high-powered rifles, or bow hunting. But as we got into scopes, range finders and other electronics, a surprising majority opposed their use—even the hunters among

©W W W.ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/AKCHAMCZUK

I talk a good bit about our different hunting cultures. We find acceptable what we were raised with, or what we’ve become accustomed to.

them. When I listed the factors used in domesticating animals like cattle and sheep and compared those to what some are doing with farmed deer, it was all but unanimous against the procedures. Only one boy favored it all, and his dad owned a deer farm. This reminded me of an earlier meeting I attended of the Southeast Deer Study Group (SEDSG). This is an organization of 200–400 federal, state and private deer biologists from Texas through the south up to Maryland. At each annual meeting they have an evening “Shootin’ from the Hip” session, where the floor is open for discussion of controversial topics (usually after imbibing some adult beverages). At this meeting, in Jackson, Mississippi, the Texans berated the Mississippi deer managers over the fact that they allowed hunting with dogs. The Bulldogs countered that the Aggies were unethical because they allowed hunting over bait (Mississippi now allows that too). My thought was, are either of these techniques wrong, or both—or neither? A few years later, after I’d moved to North Carolina, I was asked to debate the issue of high fences and deer farming

at another annual meeting of the SEDSG in San Antonio. Since I was facing old friends, and wanting to get back out of Texas alive, I tried to make my arguments against high fences humorous. I even came up with “The 12 Step Program to Lose the Trophy Hunting Addiction.” I talked a good bit about our different hunting cultures. We find acceptable what we were raised with, or what we’ve become accustomed to. I used the analogy of the term Bar-BQue to make my point. In California, where I was raised, BBQ is anything you do on an outdoor grill, whether it be hamburgers, fish or steaks. In Texas, it always refers to beef brisket, and BBQ can grammatically be a noun, verb or adjective. In North Carolina, BBQ means pulled pork, and the sauce can be tomato-based or vinegar, depending on the locale. So we clearly have culinary cultures in the country. We also have hunting cultures. My dad and I used a dog for tracking, but never would have thought to use dogs for flushing deer, much less a blind or stand of any sort. When I moved to Texas I was dumbfounded to find that just about everyone, including my money-challenged students, paid for FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 59

hunting leases. I’d never heard of such a thing in California, or while hunting while in college in Colorado or Pennsylvania. In my youth, we looked down on those who “posted” their land, and we always hunted free with the landowner’s permission. But once I adapted to the hunting culture of Texas, I could see the value in providing hunting income to landowners, limiting the number of hunters (deer hunting in Pennsylvania reminded me of my days as a Marine in Vietnam), and providing income to enhance habitat. Likewise the issue of high fences and the techniques that go with them (Figure 2) have always been controversial, both inside and outside the Boone and Crockett Club. While the fences restrict the movement of deer and other game and predators, and in some states can restrict animal migration, they can have advantages. In Texas, many landowners feel they need to fence their property to allow them to manage the age structure and buck/ doe ratios in their herds and to keep the herd within carrying capacity. The fences keep deer from other ranches out and can protect habitat. Unfortunately, this then can lead to a bunch of mischief, as listed in Figure 2. I’ve seen exceptionally well-managed deer on high-fenced ranches. But where I’ve seen yearround feeding, breeding and the plethora of other animal husbandry techniques, I’ve seen degraded habitat and the so called “Frankendeer.” So what is ethical and what is not? Clearly, we need to adhere to game laws, which differ from state to state and from Mexico to Canada. But is that enough? Our fair chase doctrine states that we need to provide the game with a reasonable chance to escape. Are the use of muzzleloaders or bow and arrow while 60 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

stalking our game on the ground the only way to achieve that? As discussed in the last issue of this magazine, how do we ensure that, “The ‘no guarantees’ nature of hunting is one of its most appealing attributes” (Fair Chase, Spring 2018, pages 12–13) Or, as discussed in the same issue, are we dividing hunters against each other by even discussing these issues (pages 54–56). I don’t believe so. Times change, equipment changes, cultures change and public opinion changes. We need to adapt to all of those, within reason. Keeping the discussion open allows for hunters to communicate and interact with each other. It allows us to examine our own and others’ cultures, and search our own consciousness. Just because I refuse to utilize some legal hunting technique doesn’t mean that you are wrong in using it. It doesn’t make you right either, but that’s for you to decide. As Ted Vitali said in the Spring 2018 issue, we need to ensure that we are hunting and not just killing, and the public needs to understand the difference. No wildlife biologist can write an article like this without quoting Aldo Leopold, the father of game management in this country. He said, “The ethics of sportsmanship is not a fixed code, but must be formulated by the individual, with no referee but the Almighty.” As in my last article, here I again disagree with Aldo. Although Aldo is right for the individual hunter on his/her hunt, we as a hunting community must keep this dialogue open and be able to set and adapt to changing standards, or else someone else will do it for us. n

FIGURE 2. ASPECTS OF DOMESTICATION OF ANIMALS Artificial insemination Artificial waterers Breeding Brush/tree clearing Cloning Counting deer Culling Drugs/hormones for antler growth Fencing Food Plantings Marking/Branding Predator elimination Private ownership Supplemental feeding Translocating animals Vaccination Worming through feed Year-round feeding

To me, that was a real “hunt.” But were my earlier hunts from stands and blinds not real hunts?

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 CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 61

The

Flathead Flathead Lake lies nestled between the Mission and Salish

In Montana folklore, the Flathead Lake Monster is a creature located in Flathead Lake. Its appearance is very similar to that of the Loch Ness Monster, described as a large eel-shaped creature, round with a wavy body like a snake, that spans from twenty to forty feet.

mountains in western Montana. Carved by glacial activity, this body of water is the largest natural lake in the Western U.S. with more than 190 square miles in surface area and stretching nearly 30 miles long and 16 miles wide. Its beauty is admired by all who lay eyes on it. Folks travel from all over the world to experience everything the lake has to offerâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; from the deep, crystal clear waters teeming with fish to the history of the residents of the past painted on the cliff walls hugging its In 1908 the University of Montana. shore. Rising from the selected land on Wild Horse Island, waters, whose depth can reach nearly 400 Flathead Lake for biological purposes. feet, are numerous islands, some of which are privately held. Others are publicly managed, including the crown jewel of them all, Wild Horse Island State Park.

1855: Hell Gate Treaty creates Flathead Reservation.

1887: Allotment Act (Dawes Act) begins the dismemberment of the reservation.

1850 1855 1860 1865 1870 1875 1880 1885 62 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Lake Monster JUSTIN SPRING

DIRECTOR OF BIG GAME RECORDS

HISTORICAL PHOTOS COURTESY UNIVERSIT Y OF MONTANA-MISSOUL A, MANSFIELD LIBRARY

The history of the island, which has produced the largest Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep in recorded history, has a past that parallels much of the history of the American West and its wildlife—at least in relative modern times starting in the mid-1800s. The majority of Flathead Lake, including Wild Horse Island, lies within the boundaries of the Flathead Indian Reservation that was created under the Hellgate Treaty of 1855. The origins of the naming of the island are disputed; however, the first known reference appears in an 1854 journal. One of the stories is that a tribal member had some horses stolen by the Blackfeet; he then stole a band

of them back and placed them on Wild Horse Island for his children in an attempt to prevent them from being stolen back. The tale of the creation and ultimate attempts to dismantle the reservation were common in those days. Numerous regional tribes and bands of those tribes were being forced onto a section of land through a treaty whose ramifications and concept they didn’t fully comprehend. If being forced from traditional lands wasn’t bad enough, the tribes endured another change when Congress passed the 1887 Dawes Act (also known as the Allotment Act), where each tribal member was allotted a set

amount of land per person or family. This land assignment was an attempt to force the tribes into more of a farming lifestyle than their historical hunting and gathering culture and was greatly opposed by the tribal leaders. Any unoccupied land or land not included in the allotments or villas was opened to homesteading. There were two parcels on Wild Horse Island that tribal members had claimed, and the rest became available to non-native settlers in 1910. Numerous folks tried farming the area, but none successfully. The only remnants of those days are a few weathered house and barn frames and rusting farm equipment that is slowly being reclaimed by the harshness of the

land that is the island. While the farming failed to take root, it began the establishment of the noxious weeds and assault on the native Palouse Prairie. The prairie once stretched from northwestern Montana westward though the Idaho Panhandle into Washington and eastern Oregon. Palouse grasslands or prairie are a semi-arid habitat type found within the rain shadow of the Cascade mountain range. Characterized by native wheatgrass and fescue, most of these rolling plains have been converted to agriculture or allowed to be infiltrated by cheatgrass and other exotic species. Reduced to only a couple isolated areas from its once expansive range, the native Palouse Prairie exists in three known locations

Tourists visiting the newly founded Glacier National Park would visit Wild Horse Island.

1908: State receives a portion of the Island for biologic study area.

1910: Homestead Act opened Reservation to NonNative Americans.

1917: First attempt at sheep introduction takes place, all six sheep perish.

1890 1895 1890 1895 1900 1905 1910 1915 FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 63

in Montana with Wild Horse Island being one of them. The first major land acquisition to take place on the island happened in 1915 when Colonel Almond A. White purchased several parcels. While not much is known of his exact vision, it is believed that he had hoped to build scouting camps, a large observatory, and a luxury hotel. This also started the idea of bringing different species to the island in hopes of augmenting the prevalent mule deer and blue grouse populations already there. The first sheep introductions took place in 1917, though all six transplants perished in rather short order. During this time, White had begun selling villas on the island in hopes that the influx of tourists visiting the newly founded Glacier National Park would purchase them. While some of the villas were sold, White died bankrupt in 1923 and the remaining unsold parcels were confiscated for unpaid taxes. One of the parcels sold was to Robert Edgington and

his wife Clara Isabelle who would later build the only commercial establishment in the island’s history, the Hiawatha Lodge, which was completed in 1931. Historic photos show well-heeled folks enjoying cocktails at the establishment overlooking the lake. While the lodge was in operation, horses and powerboats were brought to the island for the guests’ enjoyment. It was in an effort to save these boats during a severe squall in 1934 that Edgington was thrown into the turbulent waters and was unable to recover. His wife had no desire to continue to run the business, and the lodge began to fall to disrepair. In 1939, the first successful sheep relocation took place with a private individual bringing two lambs to the island. These came from the Mission Mountains south of the lake. A year later, Lewis Pennel bought the Edgington property and the remainder of the island’s parcels from individual owners. Shortly thereafter, Dr. J.C. Burnett

purchased the island and used it to produce a line of Arabian horses. It was during his ownership that the second transplant of sheep to the island took place in 1947. The population was estimated at least 12 sheep at the time, with six additional sheep (three rams and three ewes) added from the Sun River herd. Eight years later, in 1954, the island’s sheep population was estimated at 90 animals. Additionally, an estimated 300–400 mule deer lived on the island plus some 100 of Burnett’s Arabian line. It was this year that Montana Fish and Game Commission started exporting sheep from the island with the first transplant being 12 sheep taken to Kootenai Falls in Lincoln County, Montana. Research of the island’s sheep populations began in the 1950s under the guidance of past Boone and Crockett Club Records Chairman Dr. Philip L. Wright from the University of Montana. At the outset of the research, it was noted the native grasses were being heavily grazed. Much of

this early research took place looking into the high prevalence of lungworm of the sheep. The scientific literature at the time revealed most populations around the West were declining, but the island’s sheep population was rapidly increasing. Reading these thesis papers reveals these budding sheep biologists were really at the forefront of wildlife capture techniques. It was noted in a research paper done in 1954 that the researchers started using sheep dogs to round up the lambs for transport. This worked well until the ewes caught on to what was happening and would intervene. Research notes state that, “the dogs would not perform as desired.” The researcher surmised a better trained dog may have a higher success of capture using this method. Eventually they landed on a method where they would approach the sheep in the dark with two researchers; one researcher would shine a light in the lamb’s eyes, while the second would spring forward capturing the lamb by hand.

The Hiawatha Lodge was built by Reverend Robert Edington and served as a dude ranch for wealthy tourists beginning in 1931. 1940s: Lewis Pennel of Helena buys the Edgington Property and acquires the remainder of the island from other individual owners. He petitions Montana Game Commission to stock deer, mountain sheep, elk, antelope, and game birds on the island.

1923: Colonel Almond A. White dies bankrupt and all remaining unsold property confiscated for delinquent taxes.

1939: Two sheep are brought to Wild Horse Island. One male and one female yearling are introduced. Most likely these two came from the Mission Range south of the lake by a private individual.

1947: Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (MTFWP) conducts second transplant to Wild Horse Island. There is an estimated 12 sheep on the island at this time from the original transplant. Six additional sheep are brought in from the Sun River Canyon (three ewes and three rams) by MTFWP.

1954: Approximately 100 horses are on Wild Horse Island in addition to 90 sheep and 300-400 mule deer. Twelve sheep are moved to Lincoln County, Montana from the island. 1955: Twenty-four sheep are transferred from the island to three different locations throughout Montana.

1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 64 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Lake County Commissioners stating they wanted to sell the island with the intention of increasing the tax base. In 1962, Bourke MacDonald purchased the island and hired a landscape architect who helped him establish 500 parcels. They were all shaped round to prevent any parcels bordering on a neighbor’s parcel and also in an attempt to prevent future development. He also set the parcels 10 feet above the high-water mark to prevent shoreline development. After his purchase he worked with Montana Fish and Game Commission encouraging folks to visit the island to photograph the wildlife. Only 49 had been sold when MacDonald passed away in 1973. His family wanted the island protected, so this time the state of Montana and The Nature Conservancy stepped up to formulate a plan to acquire the island. A negotiated purchase price of 50 percent of the assessed value was agreed upon, with the MacDonald family donating the remaining 50 percent or $1.75

The first sheep introductions took place in 1917, though all six transplants perished in rather short order. 1957: Six sheep are moved to Jefferson County, Montana from the Island.

1971: Sheep herd is estimated at 240 individuals, 75 mule deer, one horse and one mule.

1958: Two transplants totaling 12 sheep are moved to two locations in Montana.

1972: Sheep herd experiences severe winter and is reduced to 205 by that spring.

1964: There are 130 sheep and 200 mule deer on the island at this time. 1969: Twenty-three sheep are moved to Sanders County, Montana.

1975: Two sheep are taken from the Island to Sanders County, Montana. 1978: Wild Horse Island becomes a Montana State Park managed as a “primitive area”. One hundred sheep are removed from the island in an attempt to improve habitat conditions and a population goal of roughly 100 sheep is established for the island.

million to the state. This left $1.75 million the state had to come up with to purchase the island. Each year, the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) allocates money to either state or federal land acquisitions in an effort to safeguard our natural resources. This fund was created by a bipartisan bill passed by Congress in 1964, which allocated oil and gas earnings from offshore leases so no

taxpayer money was spent. Montana’s allocation had to cover both local and state government requests and the purchase price. This would have prevented any other project under the LWCF from getting funded if the request to purchase the island happened in a single year. While this seemed daunting, the Department of Interior had produced a document on the islands of the U.S. in the early

©L. VICTOR CL ARK

The following winter was a severe one and even though many of the horses were pulled off the island, the majority perished. Conflicting reports exist on the extent of the die-off, but one report states that after Burnett’s death in 1959, the entire island was listed for sale which included three horses and one mule. In this period from 1954–1959, 54 sheep were transplanted off the island to numerous locations around the state in an effort to rebuild historic Montana populations. These transplants still continue today, amounting to hundreds of sheep added to the current Montana bighorn populations. After Burnett’s death, the future of the island was in limbo. There were three major players all hoping to stake their claim on the island. The Nature Conservancy, Rockefeller Foundation, and the state of Montana were all vying for the purchase of the island. These three entities all lost out on their chance to manage the island after a vote from the

Key measurements from the new World’s Record ram’s horns (above) that contribute to its final score are horn lengths of 48-3/8 and 49-6/8, circumferences at the bases of 16-3/8 and 16-4/8, and fourth quarter circumferences of 11-2/8 and 11-4/8 inches.

1979: Eighteen sheep are shipped from the Island to Washington State University (WSU) for research, 61 are sent to Sanders County, Montana, in three different locations, and 25 are relocated to Rock Creek in Granite County, Montana. Fifteen years later Jim Weatherly takes the Montana state record from this herd, which stands for nearly 25 years.

1993: Eight sheep are shipped from the island to WSU for research, nine to Lower Hells Canyon in Oregon, 12 to Fox Creek in Oregon, 15 sheep to Teton County, Montana, 26 sheep to Gallatin County, Montana, three sheep to Lake County, Montana, and 32 sheep to Lewis and Clark County, Montana.

1981: Five sheep are taken off the Island to Sanders County, Montana.

1994: Twelve sheep are shipped to Fox Creek in Oregon and 14 to Downey Gulch in Oregon.

1987: Two sheep from Lincoln County, Montana are transplanted to the Island.

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 65

NEW WORLD’S RECORD BIGHORN SHEEP A special Boone and Crockett Club judges panel declared a ram from Montana as the new World’s Record bighorn sheep. The four-member panel of senior Boone and Crockett Official Measures re-scored the ram’s horns and determined the final score to be 216-3/8 points B&C, surpassing the current World’s Record - a ram that scores 209-4/8. Special judges panels are convened to declare new World’s Records by confirming an official entry score. This ram’s entry score accepted on February 8 was 216-3/8. “This ram is significant for many reasons,” said Justin Spring, the Club’s director of Big Game Records. “One of many things worth noting is that since the Club’s current scoring system was adopted in 1950, this is only the fifth World’s Record bighorn, and three of these have been declared since just 2001. If anything, we’re now seeing what nature and sound wildlife management are capable of producing in the wild.” The panel scoring took place at the world headquarters of the Wild Sheep Foundation, located in Bozeman, Montana. On hand were B&C officials, Montana State Governor Steve Bullock, and Wild Sheep Foundation President and CEO Gray Thornton. “Here in Montana, we have a rich history of bringing diverse groups together to preserve and protect wildlife habitat and public lands,” said Governor Steve Bullock. “This is truly a Montana conservation success story.” “Wild Sheep Foundation (WSF) is honored to host the panel certification of this World’s Record bighorn and this momentous announcement from our Governor that Montana, the “Land of the Giants” is home to the largesbighorn sheep known,” stated Gray N. Thornton, WSF’s President & CEO. “Wild Horse Island is not only an incredible watchable wildlife asset but is an exceptional source with obviously incredible genetics to repatriate bighorn sheep throughout Montana” Thornton added. The nine-year-old ram lived his entire life on Wild Horse Island. The ram was found by Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks officials who determined it had died of natures causes. Because a hunter did not take the ram, the department entered the ram into B&C records on behalf on the citizens of Montana. Spring said, “This ram doesn’t have the longest horns on record, or the largest bases, but the mass of his horns carried over the entire length of nearly 50-inch horns is what makes this ram the largest we’ve seen by a significant margin. The last three World’s Record rams have been 208-1/8, 208-3/8, 209-4/8 and now 216-3/8. That’s a jump we just never expected to see.”

1970s which directly named Wild Horse Island as an island to be procured and preserved. The governor authorized the purchase of up to $2 million for the island in 1977. Because the state was unable to purchase the island outright, it was divided into seven equal parcels which the state agreed to purchase in a predetermined order with matching funds from the LWCF. The MacDonald family agreed to donate any increase in the appraised value to the state as well. Since this time, the island has been managed as a primitive recreation area with no camping allowed on the island. Local charters bring visitors to the island to explore on their own as regulations prevent any outfitter or guide from accompanying guests onto the island. Management is currently jointly managed by Montana FWP, Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS), and the Confederate Salish Kootenai Tribe (CSKT). Natural resource management actions include prescribed burning and noxious weed spraying as well as maintaining the pine stands to prevent encroachment of other trees such as Douglas fir. In addition to the sheep and mule deer, a population of 5 wild horses are maintained on the island to preserve the namesake.

When the scores of these giant rams of Wild Horse Island were first brought to the public’s attention, the Club received numerous comments of how they should not be accepted as they weren’t able to be hunted. While the island does provide a quality habitat where the sheep are not exposed to hunter harvest pressure, the island as a whole is a conservation success story which has resulted in opportunities for thousands of folks to pursue rams in their native habitat. As stated earlier, the history of Wild Horse Island is, in fact, the history of much of our wildlife today: westward expansion, development, private individuals stepping up, research, federal programs contributing to the mission through oil and gas revenues, and ultimately, joint management shared by numerous agencies. Regarding the trophies being ineligible due to the lack of hunting pressure, the records were never intended to serve as a competition amongst hunters or to list only hunter-taken game. The idea that somehow these sheep are any less valuable or deserving than a hunter-taken ram is simply not true. Research shows that Wild Horse has been home to coyotes, mountain lions—and in a couple cases, grizzly

2008: Thirty-eight sheep are relocated to Lincoln County, Montana. 2010: Twenty-four sheep are relocated to Sanders County, Montana and 16 to Lincoln County, Montana. 2012: Forty-nine sheep are moved from the island to Beaverhead County, Montana. 2014: Twenty-seven sheep are moved to Sanders County, Montana, and 33 sheep to Lincoln County, Montana.

2000 2005 2010 2015 66 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

bears. Early research indicated that during bad winters, the lake would freeze, and potential emigration of mule deer took place—which means that under natural conditions, the sheep can come and go as they please as long as winter severity is maintained. The one thing the island does provide is a model research station showcasing how resource management can affect the sheep. With the island being just over 2,000 acres, this provides opportunity to control factors of research that can be extrapolated to numerous populations across the sheep’s historic range. The major issue the island faces today lies in the lack of funding necessary to maintain this gem. Managed as part of a complex of state parks around Flathead Lake, the funds to do anything are very limited. The challenges it faces today are common throughout the West— noxious weeds, long-term fire suppression, development, etc. This park is managed with state parks funds, and the

sheep raised are used t o supplement numerous sheep populations both in and out of the state. Montana has a small fee added to vehicle registrations to help offset parks costs but comes far short of supplying what is necessary to cover this. The new World’s Record ram lived on Wild Horse Island. The buzz this sheep has generated is a prime opportunity to investigate how to fund conservation by thinking outside the box of hunter-generated revenue, which is constantly proving to fall short. Boone and Crockett Club has always allowed the entry of found or picked-up trophies into our records as they are part of the story of conservation. The sheep living on this island are a testament to what modern conservation and wildlife management can accomplish. Stand with us in recognizing what sheep and this island have done in recent times and make your voice heard in finding ways to fund conservation to ensure all species of North American big game continue to thrive going forward. n

©L. VICTOR CL ARK

The island provides a model research station showcasing how resource management can affect the sheep.

BEYOND THE SCORE BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB POLICY ON FOUND/PICKED-UP TROPHIES The Boone and Crockett Club sets the rules for entering a trophy into its records books, which are based primarily on principles of wildlife conservation and fair chase. The fact that the Club accepts entries that have not been harvested by a hunter, but instead are “found” by people (whether on a hunt or not) may be surprising to some, but there are sound reasons for doing so. Found trophies include animals that die of natural causes, such as advanced age, environmental factors, and predation. Found trophies also include animals that die of unnatural causes, such as vehicle collisions. Found entries, along with the locations where found, are listed as “picked up” in the Club’s records books to distinguish them from hunter-taken entries, which are subject to different eligibility requirements, including the principles of fair chase. The big game records of the Boone and Crockett Club are a set of wildlife and hunting data that the Club began to collect over a century ago to initially track the recovery of big game populations from decades of unregulated overharvesting. The focus today is on monitoring the quality and distribution of specimens that natural conditions and sound wildlife management are capable of producing. Having sportsmen participate in this data collection system by voluntarily submitting their trophies is vital. Having people submit trophies they find is equally important. Mature males that have lived long enough in the wild under favorable conditions to grow large antlers, horns, or skulls to qualify for the Club’s records book are indicators of healthy ecosystems, balanced age structures within a given population, acceptable mortality (natural and human-caused) and sustainable recruitment. The Boone and Crockett Club maintains that all trophies, both harvested by hunters and those that are found, add to the data set that helps game managers adopt successful policies to benefit big game populations of North America. The Club’s records program was never intended to be a numeric ranking of a hunter’s skills.

The special judges panel included (left to right) Official Measurers Roger Atwood, L. Victor Clark, Fred King, and Pat McKenzie.

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 67

CAN IT MAKE YOU A MORE ETHICAL HUNTER?

Personal ethics are just that, personal, which means it’s up to the individual to decide what works or doesn’t work for them and what is or isn’t necessarily held up against the type of experience we seek.

68 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

KEITH BALFOURD B&C PROFESSIONAL MEMBER HUNTER AND CONSERVATION ETHICS SUB-COMMITTEE

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t think so. It appears that some product manufacturers these days are concerned about the ethics associated with the use of their products. On the surface this would appear to be a good thing; a conscientious effort to be offering the right things for sportsmen to use for the good of the user and hunting. This is true for most, but the rub for me is the marketing claims by some manufacturers and the reasons behind them. Some make the claim that using their product will make you a more ethical hunter. I had no idea a product could do that— change our attitude and approach—like ethics on tap! Who knew? I’ve always believed an ethical approach came from within, from our teachings, experiences, and what we get or hope to get out of hunting. This would be like saying you won’t be choosing your next deer rifle, it will choose you. That’s a lot of power to give to a thing. Then there are the products that walk the line of ethical to begin with, and the marketers know it going in, so they add the spin. This is most prevalent today in the extreme long-range shooting category. To make things a bit more acceptable, the claims can look like this: “for more assured, humane kills,” or “take the guesswork out of your next shot.” A recent granddaddy example comes from a night-vision optics company that chose this as their marketing tagline; “Redefining Fair Chase.” Say what? On one hand, I guess we, as ethical, fair-chase hunters, should be proud and flattered. Hunting ethics and fair chase are alive and well and must carry some weight, otherwise, marketers would neither be concerned about it nor try and use it to sell their wares. On the other hand, should we have something to say about attempts to trade on the good name of our code of ethics when the No. 1 thing challenging our ethics today is advancements in technology aimed at making hunting more assured and in some cases, easier. Don’t get me wrong, technology can be a good thing. It has brought us many things to make hunting and shooting safer, more reliable—and yes—more assured, quick, and humane kills. But can our ethics be bought, and are they for sale? Marketers playing the ethics card may just end up being one of those things that should be taken on face value, and on a caseby-case basis. Personal ethics are just that, personal, which means it’s up to the individual to decide what works or doesn’t work for them and what is or isn’t necessarily held up against the type of experience we seek. I do know one thing. If hunting were a sure thing, it would not be as appealing or memorable. And harder still to call it “hunting.” Even some folks I know who have gone down the canned-shoot path have come back with, “Been there, done that, got the t-shirt, not going back.” They lost something special from their hunting experience—that no-guarantees nature of hunting that drives us to develop skills, push ourselves, and what “most memorable” rests upon. How many times have you earned it, and win, lose or draw said to yourself, “Now that was a hunt.” I don’t think we can honestly say we can buy that type of experience even if it says so right on the package. n

Grandfathers Know Best. “My passion for the outdoors and hunting began at an early age on hunting trips with my Grandfather. Not only was he an incredible shot with his old 30-06 and his 28 gauge which he used for ducks, but he was also a conservationist. From my Grandfather I learned the importance of the hunting community to the preservation of both wildlife and habitat. It is important to me to continue that tradition. My interest in wildlife and conservation led me to the Boone and Crockett Club. There is no organization that does more for game animals in North America than the Boone and Crockett Club. It is important to maintain the Club’s efforts through the philanthropy of its members. This interest led me to include the Club in my will.” — Ned Holmes, Member, Boone and Crockett Club

For more information, please contact: Winton C. Smith, J.D.

Boone and Crockett Club Foundation

(901)301-9275 winton@wintonsmith.com

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 69

FOR THE RECORD Our major influx of trophies is in full swing as I write this column, and things so far are looking pretty good in terms of numbers. When forecasting entries, we look back at the last couple awards programs and try to figure out entry rates for the year to plan out processing times. As of this writing, we are about 200 entries ahead of normal for this period approaching the close of the 30th Awards, which, by the way, is December 31, 2018. While that may seem a long way out, if you are holding any entries, please submit them to us as soon as possible. Even if you are waiting for a tag or another document from the hunter, please don’t hold them for more than a couple weeks. Once they are in the system, we can help by sending notices requesting these documents and making sure all the materials are received, and the trophy is accepted. All entries must be postmarked by December 31, 2018, to be eligible for the 30th Awards Program. Every close of an Awards Program finds us waiting for final materials on numerous trophy entries. However, if the requested material is not received in a timely manner after the deadline, then the trophies will have to be moved to the 31st Awards Period which is set to close December 31, 2021. Unfortunately, this is also the time we have the highest number of unhappy trophy owners with regard to final scores, Official Measurer conduct, etc. Again, I ask each 70 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

TROPHY TALK

Official Measurer (OM) to review the OM code of conduct with special attention to the sections saying you won’t score trophies where there is a perceived conflict of interest and will refrain from expressions of public opinion that may be contrary to policies or procedures of the Club, including expressing opinion publically about other OMs abilities. If Official Measurers are mindful of public perception and work to inform the folks for whom they are scoring that the records book was never intended to be a competition amongst hunters, most, if not all, of the complaints we field would cease. The records were designed to recognize and track

wildlife management and bring attention to those hunters who were able to take a mature male specimen past its breeding prime while limiting themselves to the rules and ethics of fair chase. We strive to gauge wildlife management successes and failures. If someone tells you they don’t care about their name in a book, let them know the intention of records is far more weighted towards conservation than personal recognition. We are ever indebted to the majority of our measurers who perform their duties year in and year out precisely and professionally. Unfortunately a few bad cases we have had to deal with recently stick out, so I would like to discuss a few

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

issues we have been seeing as a heads up to everyone. I ask all our official measurer’s keep an eye out that you don’t get inadvertently pulled into one of these situations. Please do not release original score charts to the hunter or, especially the media, prior to them being reviewed by Missoula. We ask all original score charts that meet or are close to the minimum entry score be submitted directly to Missoula. Giving the trophy owner a copy of the entry score sheet is appropriate and encouraged but please let them know

The special judges panel met at the Wild Sheep Foundation (WSF) headquarters in Bozeman, Montana, to score the new World’s Record bighorn sheep. FROM LEFT TO RIGHT: Official Measurer Pat McKenzie, WSF President and B&C Professional Member Gray Thornton, Official Measurer Roger Atwood, Montana Governor Steve Bullock, B&C Professional Member Justin Spring, Official Measurers Fred King, B&C Professional Member Jack Reneau, L.Victor Clark, and B&C Chief of Staff and Professional Member Tony Schoonen.

it is a preliminary score until it is reviewed and accepted. This especially holds true for high ranking trophies be it for a state, county, weapon specific harvest, etc. Many trophies are green scored each year which we leave up to the measurers’ discretion. If a green score is performed a score sheet should not be produced and/ or released. When we do green scores here in Missoula I will tell the hunter a ballpark figure. Then schedule a time after the drying period to officially score the trophy for them. These requests are in an effort to ensure clarity and reinforce all of our measurers’ individual abilities. When a score that has been previously published changes it is very hard to explain to the public the reasons for it and it ends up discrediting the original measurers’ ability in their mind. Please note that a new World’s Record bighorn sheep was just confirmed. The history of the island that produced it as well as the press release can be found on page 62.

Our spring is quickly getting booked with two Official Measurer workshops scheduled for May and June in Missoula and one just completed in British Columbia. If you or someone you know is interested in becoming an Official Measurer, applications can be found online at www.boone-crockett.org. As noted in April’s recent edition of Kyle Lehr’s monthly e-newsletter, there may be a slight delay in processing times as we are in the process of testing our new database and entry software. We still do not have a solid date when this will be activated, but when it is, there will be some very exciting changes in terms of the ease of submissions for our Official Measurers as well as material needs notifications and other major upgrades to our current processing methods. Please keep sending us any scoring questions, and as always, thanks to all Official Measurers for their tireless work in promoting the records program. 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

Associate Sign-Up Incentive Program Leader Board *As of April 13, 2018

CONGRATS TO OUR TOP PRIZE-WINNERS! Stanley Zirbel – 34 Bucky Ihlenfeldt – 31 Ken Witt – 18 Daniel A. Doughty III – 9 Jerry E. Lunde – 9 Ralph Stayner – 6 Carl Frey – 5 Mark Miller – 5 Ab England – 4

Roger Kingsley – 4 Michael Moline – 4 Harrell Wilson – 4 Mike Golightly – 3 Daniel Hollingsworth – 3 Chris Lacey – 3 Ron Madsen – 3 John Ohmer – 3 Tim Rozewski – 3

2 ASSOCIATE SIGN-UPS

Ricky D. Addison, Thomas E. Baine, Mark Bara, Don Biggs, John Bogucki, Richard A. Bonander, Jason Browning, Buck Buckner, John Busic, Brent Christensen, L. Victor Clark, Chad A. Coburn, Hub Grounds, Gilbert Hernandez, John Hooten, Stephen J. Hutton, Stacee Kleinsmith, Joe Lacefield, Marvin D. LaRose, Toby Montgomery, Bill Nash Jr., Will Ogden, Eric M. Rominger, Eric Stanosheck, Gary Wegner, Brent Wilkes, Jim Williams, Jennifer Wood, Robert Wood

1 ASSOCIATE SIGN-UP

Grant Adkisson, T.K. Atkinson, Mike Barrett, Bob Black, Steve Boero, Richard Burley, Dean H. Cook, Stephen L. Cook, Scott G. Corley, Brian Dam, Robert Deis, Chad Dillabough, Tim Donnelly, James Dowd, Randal Dufault, Tracy Dunkin, Gary D. English, Mark A. Erspamer, Luke Finney, Kevin Freymiller, Ronnie Gadberry, HP Giger, TJ Gould, Robert Graber, Tony J. Grabowski, Clifford Gray, Len Guldman, Jeffrey Gunnels, Charles Harden, Donald Haseley, Arthur F. Hayes, Everett Headley, Gary R. Howard, Tim Humes, Richard E. Johndrow, Walter E. Johnson, Derris R. Jones, Mark Jones, Edward Larimer, Clinton Latham, Neil Lawson, John Legnard, Bria Martin, James W. Martin, Corey Mason, Micah Mauney, James McCloskey, Steve McMillen, Thomas Milne, Skip Moore, George M. Moore, Corey Neill, Clay Newcomb, Ronald Newman, James Newport, Robert Newton IV, Matt Nilsen, Frank S. Noska, Robert Novosad, Don Patterson, Don Perrien, Ron G. Pesek, Jim R. Peterson, Richard A. Pflanz, John Phillips, John Ramsey, Ryan Rauscher, Ronald S. Richman, Ken J. Rimer, Wayne Rodd, Arnold V. Sandoval, Michael W. Schlegel, Jeffrey L. Schneider, Glen Sellsted, Curtis P. Smiley , Ted Spraker, John Stein, Kelly Stockdale, Darrel Sudduth, Ed Swanson, Stephen C. Swihart Jr., Jerry L. Tkac, Michael Trujillo, Victor Trujillo, Brent Trumbo, Tony Vidrine, Gene A. Wagner Jr., Lee Wahlund, William Walters, Gerry Wegner, Brad Zundel

(value up to $350)

75 Associates – Yeti cooler and rambler package (value up to $500) 100 Associates – Congratulations! YOU’LL RECEIVE A KIMBER RIFLE!

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.

NOTE: Limit to one rifle per year, three rifles per Official Measurer.

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 71

JACK STEELE PARKER

GENERATION

NEXT FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

BLACK BEAR

21 3/16 21 2/16 20 15/16 20 13/16 20 7/16

Marshall Co., MN Cade J. Knutsen Bell Co., KY Noah D. Brock Page Co., VA Shane M. Watson Gila Co., AZ Drew M.F. Gunnell Little Swan River, SK Jillian H. Lubachowski

TYPICAL AMERICAN ELK 394 2/8 400 1/8

Sandoval Co., NM

TYPICAL MULE DEER 193 4/8 230 5/8 191 1/8 194 3/8

Elmore Co., ID Fremont Co., WY

TYPICAL COLUMBIA BLACKTAIL 144 3/8 148 2/8

Siskiyou Co., CA

2017 2016 2015 2017 2017

R. Dufault K. Ison B. Trumbo M. Zieser K. Somogyi

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 Club’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 Spring 2018 issue of Fair Chase was published.

Kaylin J. Davis 2017 R. Madsen Russell D. Purcell 1958 R. Hatfield Lillyan K. Hamilton 2017 B. Wilkes Luke B. Jenner 2017 S. Boero

TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER 179 1/8 173 6/8 170 7/8 164 7/8 162 7/8

208 6/8 178 7/8 182 6/8 187 6/8 190 4/8

Osage Co., KS Pipestone Lake, SK Logan Co., WV Logan Co., NE Pepin Co., WI

Reid T. Crawford Emily C. Quibell Chase H. Herndon Mason C. Amweg Gavin E. Tappe

2017 2016 2016 2014 2015

M. Peek H. Dreger G. Surber R. Wood D. Bathke

NON-TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER 189 3/8 191 5/8

Switzerland Co., IN Garrett E. Demaree

2016

Cade J. Knutsen

J. Hooten

NON-TYPICAL COUES’ WHITETAIL 124 7/8 131 4/8

Pima Co., AZ

Kresent A. Rencher

2016

D. May

PRONGHORN 82 2/8

83 4/8

Natrona Co., WY

Riley M. Ullery

2017

R. Bonander

BIGHORN SHEEP 185 7/8 186 5/8 Baker Co., OR Mason J. Miles 2017 E. Buckner 176 1/8 176 5/8 Ravalli Co., MT Braden R. Brugh 2017 E. Headley

Mason J. Miles 72 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Kresent A. Rencher

Kaylin J. Davis Riley M. Ullery

Garrett E. Demaree

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 73

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 Spring 2018 issue of Fair Chase was published.

B&C Associate Allen Bolen took this Quebec-Labrador caribou, scoring 378-2/8 points, on an archery hunt near Ungava Bay, Quebec, in 2017.

74 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

30 BIG GAME AWARDS TH

LISTING AND PHOTO GALLERY

TOP TO BOTTOM

BEAR & COUGAR FINAL SCORE

LOCATION

BLACK BEAR - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 23-10/16

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

21 11/16 Batchelor Lake, SK Jace B. Eagleson 2015 21 11/16 Scissors Creek, SK Nolan P. Johnson 2017 21 10/16 Rossman Lake, MB Bryan T. Klein 2017 21 8/16 Crooked Lake, SK Bowman J. Bryant 2016 21 7/16 Marshall Co., MN Andrew J. Fruetel 2017 21 3/16 Forest Co., PA Tyrone J. Cashdollar 2016 21 3/16 Fisher Branch, MB Troy Nesbit 2017 21 2/16 Whiteshell Prov. Gus A. Congemi 2017 Park, MB 21 2/16 Pepin Co., WI Dustin J. Auth 2017 21 2/16 Polk Co., MN John P. Haus 2012 21 1/16 Hunterdon Co., NJ Benjamin A. 2016 Reichenbach 21 1/16 Dauphin Lake, MB John H. Long 2017 21 1/16 Pitkin Co., CO Brent M. Smyth 2017 20 14/16 Neely Lake, SK Keegan Benko 2017 20 12/16 Sidney Lake, SK Bradley M. Rieland 2017 20 11/16 Port Camden, AK David Benitz 2017 20 10/16 Georgetown Co., SC John C. Heinemann III 2017 20 10/16 Nez Perce Co., ID Seth A. Oelke 2017 20 10/16 Saskatchewan Larry A. Hondl 2017 River, SK 20 9/16 Trippe Lake, SK Dave Tymiak 2015 20 8/16 Burnett Co., WI Jon R. Taschek 2017 20 6/16 Delta Co., CO Kevin R. Carville 2017 20 3/16 Mesa Co., CO Brandon T. Palmer 2017 20 2/16 Kupreanof Kyle E. Minnis 2016 Island, AK 20 2/16 Notre Dame Bay, NL Gregory S. Adams 2016 20 2/16 Somerset Co., PA Travis J. Buffy 2013 20 1/16 Lincoln Co., MT Paul E. Avery 2017 20 1/16 North Saskatchewan Joey W. Miazga 2017 River, SK 20 Oconto Co., WI Patrick T. Gauthier 2017 20 Grandview, MB Alexander H. Reese 2017 20 Prince Lake, ON Eddie W. Pearce 2017 20 Pasquotank Co., NC Gus A. Congemi 2016

H. Dreger H. Dreger J. Hayduk H. Dreger R. Dufault D. Bastow G. English F. Giuliani

This black bear, scoring 20-11/16 points, was taken by B&C Associate David Benitz while on an archery hunt near Port Camden, Alaska, in 2017. In 2017, Kasey D. Kuntz harvested this 381-point typical American elk while on a bow hunt in Broadwater County, Montana. In 2017, B&C Associate Royce W. Farris harvested this 24-4/16-point grizzly bear while on a hunt near Seymour Inlet, British Columbia. He was shooting a .375 H&H.

W. Bowman S. Grabow K. Griglak M. LaRose D. Waechtler J. Lorenz A. England M. Nilsen J. Westerhold D. Michael R. Dufault H. Dreger J. Ramsey C. Gray R. Black B. Harriman R. Kingsley K. Zimmerman R. Burtis A. England S. Zirbel R. Banaszak D. Nuttall S. Cook

GRIZZLY BEAR - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 27-13/16 26 6/16 25 3/16 25 24 4/16 24 4/16

Teklanika River, AK Nicholas S. Causey Big Valley Creek, BC Gerry E. Mauvieux Holmes River, BC James A. Chuipka Norton Sound, AK Andrew J. Scull Seymour Inlet, BC Royce W. Farris

2017 2017 2017 2016 2017

A. Jubenville R. Berreth R. Berreth G. English J. Baker

ALASKA BROWN BEAR - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 30-12/16 28 6/16 28 1/16 28 26 14/16 26 10/16

Kodiak Island, AK Aliulik Pen., AK Alaska Pen., AK Naknek Lake, AK Pyramid Mt., AK

Kyle T. Ryan Marshall A. Thomas Terry R. Hansen Steven L. West Zachary A. Ritter

2016 2017 2010 2016 2017

S. Kleinsmith K. Zimmerman K. Lehr E. Buckner J. Wiersum

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

ELK & MULE DEER FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

TYPICAL AMERICAN ELK - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 442-5/8 401 2/8 390 2/8 388 6/8 381 376 1/8 371 7/8 361 7/8

411 3/8 403 4/8 401 1/8 395 1/8 385 1/8 381 6/8 375 6/8

Coconino Co., AZ Sheldon M. Murphy Big Horn Co., MT Gregory D. Kurdys Park Co., WY Brendan V. Burns Broadwater Co., MT Kasey D. Kuntz Albany Co., WY Benjamin J. Gorman Park Co., WY William S. Stough Coconino Co., AZ Mike Drake

2017 2017 2013 2017 2017 2016 2017

M. Zieser M. LaRose G. Bettas J. Pallister T. Atkinson D. Hart M. Zieser

Share your field photos with us! @BooneandCrockettClub #booneandcrockettclub FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 75

NON-TYPICAL AMERICAN ELK - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 478-5/8 440 1/8 468 3/8 426 439 7/8 420 6/8 438 3/8 420 5/8 437 3/8 400 1/8 410 5/8 389 6/8 432 389 409 5/8

Clearfield Co., PA 2014 Otero Co., NM Vincent J. Cebular 2016 Chelan Co., WA Nicholas A. Gutzwiler 2017 McKinley Co., NM David B. Miller 2017 Dawes Co., NE Justin A. Misegadis 2017 Coconino Co., AZ Picked Up 2016 Powder River Kirk J. Anderson 2017 Co., MT

T. Ross T. Adams J. Wiggs R. Madsen M. Dowse G. Glasgow A. Hayes

ROOSEVELT’S ELK - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 404-6/8 357 7/8 329 7/8 327 2/8 318 2/8 283

376 1/8 356 7/8 338 4/8 329 2/8 289

Eve River, BC Upana River, BC Humboldt Co., CA Humboldt Co., CA Afognak Island, AK

Kevin T. Klumper Craig T. Huff Thomas B. Gordon Alfred W. Lundquist Mitchel P. Lepschat

2017 2017 2016 2016 2017

D. Patterson D. Patterson H. Wilson D. Perrien S. Kleinsmith

Cory J. Smith Emily A. Howard Kevin L. Sloop Peter Coelho

2017 2017 2017 2017

L. Wahlund H. Wilson H. Wilson D. Perrien

TULE ELK - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 379 327 1/8 316 2/8 302 4/8 297 6/8

349 4/8 326 2/8 312 6/8 310 5/8

Mendocino Co., CA Colusa Co., CA Colusa Co., CA Solano Co., CA

TYPICAL MULE DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 226-4/8 204 196 7/8 196 6/8 196 6/8 193 2/8 191 7/8 191 4/8 190 5/8 190 5/8 190 1/8 188 3/8 187 2/8 185 7/8 181 2/8 180 2/8

208 2/8 228 2/8 206 204 1/8 198 7/8 208 4/8 194 5/8 209 3/8 224 6/8 218 209 7/8 200 1/8 191 6/8 188 6/8 187

Coconino Co., AZ David Ware, Jr. Rio Blanco Co., CO Martin Coleman Kane Co., UT John K. Pope Great Sand Hills, SK Kellen J. Murch Kane Co., UT Thomas J. Lovrin Montrose Co., CO Albert W. Hurd III Arapahoe Co., CO Hunter C. Ross Elmore Co., ID Russell D. Purcell Rio Arriba Co., NM DeAnn R. Reval Washington Co., ID Unknown Ravalli Co., MT Fisher T. Shima La Plata Co., CO Kathryn M. Switzer Montrose Co., CO Albert W. Hurd III Boise Co., ID Joe A. Williams Garfield Co., CO Kevin R. Carville

1991 1960 2017 2017 2016 2017 2017 1962 2017 1970 2017 2017 2007 1990 2003

R. Bechtel D. McBride B. Christensen J. Clary R. Tupen D. Doughty M. Ledbetter R. Hatfield K. Tator R. Atwood K. Lehr J. Gardner D. Doughty R. Hatfield R. Black

NON-TYPICAL MULE DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 355-2/8 249 7/8 260 5/8 Boise Co., ID 248 3/8 253 6/8 Boise Co., ID 244 4/8 249 Bonneville Co., ID 231 3/8 239 7/8 Morgan Co., UT 229 2/8 234 3/8 Manito Lake, SK 226 1/8 230 7/8 Montrose Co., CO 224 1/8 228 1/8 Lake Co., MT 223 6/8 225 7/8 Cassia Co., ID 221 4/8 227 7/8 Adams Co., ID 217 3/8 228 7/8 Navajo Co., AZ 217 2/8 222 1/8 Rosebud Co., MT 215 4/8 220 6/8 Lake Co., OR

Sheldon L. Morgan Steve B. Hawkins Gordon R. Yost George A. Smith Teryn B. Strueby D.V. Manning Justin T. Burt Lance A. Vaughn Charles C. Dodge Thomas E. Soyars Kevin L. Lonebear Wilhelm T. Greenwood

1978 1979 1982 1965 2017 1961 2017 2016 1979 2016 1995 2017

R. Hatfield R. Hatfield R. Hatfield D. Nielsen A. England L. Grimming J. Williams E. Buckner R. Hatfield J. Stein A. Hayes R. Spaulding

TYPICAL COLUMBIA BLACKTAIL DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 182-2/8

TOP TO BOTTOM:

This tule elk, scoring 327-1/8 points, was taken by B&C Associate Cory J. Smith in Mendocino County, California, on a hunt in 2017. He was shooting a .300 Winchester Short Mag. B&C Associate and Official Measurer Carl D. Frey was on a hunt in Trinity County, California, when he harvested this typical Columbia blacktail deer, scoring 138-2/8 points. He was shooting a .270 Winchester. B&C Associate Jason M. Sandoval took this non-typical whitetail deer, scoring 185-2/8 points, in Carroll County, Missouri, in 2016. 76 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

148 5/8 145 5/8 138 2/8 135 2/8 134 5/8 133 2/8 126 125

157 2/8 148 6/8 145 3/8 139 7/8 135 6/8 153 4/8 129 4/8 128 2/8

Siskiyou Co., CA Trinity Co., CA Trinity Co., CA Humboldt Co., CA Mendocino Co., CA Humboldt Co., CA Curry Co., OR Curry Co., OR

Robert M. Wakefield Garrett R. Urmann Carl D. Frey Leslie E. Hudson, Jr. Kyle E. Moody Aaron V. Grabiel Ben A. Miller Ben A. Miller

2016 2017 2017 2016 2017 2016 2006 2011

S. Nasby D. Biggs L. Clark D. Biggs G. Hooper S. Boero C. Frey C. Frey

NON-TYPICAL COLUMBIA BLACKTAIL - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 208-1/8 159 2/8 163 7/8 Pierce Co., WA

Ryan D. Nauer

2016 D. Sanford

TYPICAL SITKA BLACKTAIL DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 133 111 7/8 117 2/8 Davidson Bay, AK Picked Up 111 6/8 117 1/8 Brown Cove, AK Brent R. Akers 100 3/8 106 7/8 Lindenberg Pen., AK Brent R. Akers

2016 M. Nilsen 1995 M. Nilsen 2003 M. Nilsen

TOP TO BOTTOM:

While on a 2017 hunt in Lake County, Oregon, B&C Associate Wilhelm T. Greenwood took this non-typical mule deer, scoring 215-4/8 points.

WHITETAIL DEER FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 213-5/8 187 7/8 192 7/8 Waukesha Co., WI Wade C. Wollermann 2017 P. Barwick 183 4/8 195 3/8 Mitchell Co., KS Matthew A. Nettles 2017 C. Ruth 179 3/8 188 7/8 Ward Co., ND Casey J. Peisar 2017 J. Plesuk 178 1/8 180 4/8 Stanley Co., SD Dillon K. Baloun 2016 N. Lawson 177 6/8 188 5/8 Lincoln Co., MO Stephen D. Gilbert 2017 J. Detjen 177 4/8 181 Lake of the Brian G. Nielsen 2016 H. Dreger Prairies, SK 176 5/8 187 2/8 Carroll Co., IL Nicholas W. 2016 N. Davey Kottmeyer 176 201 5/8 Guernsey Co., OH Claude L. Johnson 2016 J. Feild 176 184 7/8 Randolph Co., IN Brian A. Wilhelm 2017 M. Heeg 174 5/8 182 3/8 Rock Co., WI Noah A. Hurley 2016 P. Gauthier 174 2/8 188 7/8 Winneshiek Co., IA Clarence Mincks 2017 D. Boland 173 2/8 177 McMullen Co., TX Clifton F. Kotrla 2016 O. Carpenter 172 3/8 206 Coal Co., OK John P. McCollum 2017 G. Moore 172 2/8 181 1/8 Dimmit Co., TX Gary S. Farmer 2017 J. Dreibelbis 172 2/8 181 4/8 Sanders Co., MT K. Richard Rose 2015 L. Lack 171 5/8 189 7/8 Smoky River, AB Duane J. Solberg 2016 D. Powell 171 3/8 174 1/8 Hart Co., KY David M. Barnes 2015 G. Steele 171 2/8 186 Harrison Co., IN Victoria A. Southard 2016 M. Verble 170 7/8 180 2/8 Dimmit Co., TX Ken T. Callahan 2016 O. Carpenter 170 6/8 180 7/8 Cecil Co., MD James A. Smith 2016 R. Newton 170 3/8 193 1/8 Geary Co., KS Michael D. Marston 2017 T. Bowman 170 3/8 183 Ringgold Co., IA Daniel L. Towers 2007 K. Herring 170 2/8 174 7/8 King Co., TX Buck S. Thompson 2016 T. Bartoskewitz 168 5/8 189 4/8 Jefferson Co., WI Andrew A. Marsden 2016 P. Gauthier 168 2/8 176 4/8 Monroe Co., WI Jacob L. Schelder 2016 R. Case 168 1/8 192 3/8 Miller Co., MO Amber L. Schulte 2017 L. Lueckenhoff 168 1/8 175 5/8 Ohio Co., KY Nicolaus S. Hall 2017 K. Morphew 167 169 7/8 Hancock Co., IL Adam E. Willard 2010 E. Hendricks 166 4/8 170 5/8 Tazewell Co., IL Jeff C. Rocke 2016 E. Hendricks 164 172 6/8 Marinette Co., WI Nicholas A. Hyska 2016 A. Sternagel 163 6/8 168 3/8 Oconto Co., WI Joshua J. Brault 2016 P. Gauthier 162 7/8 179 6/8 Monroe Co., WI Peter J. Olsen 2016 R. Case 162 1/8 186 Cochrane, AB Mason E. Raymond 2016 W. Paplawski 161 6/8 165 1/8 Jasper Co., IN Nicholas S. Kowalisyn 2016 J. Bogucki 161 1/8 166 Walworth Co., WI David A. Rife 2017 P. Barwick 161 179 6/8 LaPorte Co., IN Ryan W. Clark 2017 J. Bogucki 160 2/8 176 6/8 Delaware Co., IN Edward A. Jones 2017 T. Wright 160 1/8 166 5/8 Anne Arundel Robert D. Rix 2017 S. Keithley Co., MD 160 1/8 166 7/8 Edgar Co., IL Richard E. Ueberfluss 2011 R. Rae 160 1/8 170 1/8 Mahoning Co., OH Travis P. Baxter 2016 R. Davis 160 1/8 168 6/8 Muskingum Co., OH Richard L. Spung 2016 J. Jordan 160 1/8 171 7/8 Washington Co., OH Shayne D. Stover 2016 R. Huffman 160 162 5/8 Milam Co., TX Mark R. Chadwell 2016 B. Martin

This typical Coues’ whitetail, scoring 114-7/8 points, was taken by Justin B. Lewis while hunting in Gila County Arizona, in 2016. Daniel L. Towers took this typical whitetail deer, scoring 170-3/8 points, in 2007 while hunting in Ringgold County, Iowa.

NON-TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 333-7/8 220 3/8 226 Kit Carson Co., CO Robert H. Brown 2016 214 4/8 228 3/8 Rogers Co., OK Wade M. Brewer 2017 210 4/8 238 4/8 Osage Co., OK David W. Woods 2016 209 1/8 215 1/8 Coles Co., IL Brian D. Price 2017 208 6/8 211 5/8 Iowa Co., IA Randy D. Tippie 2017 207 7/8 212 5/8 Marion Co., IN Preston O. Wagner 2016 207 6/8 216 1/8 Hancock Co., IL Rick Mullan 2016 207 3/8 212 7/8 Clark Co., IL Jordan K. Grooms 2017 205 2/8 217 2/8 Linn Co., IA Dennis D. Boots 2003 205 1/8 213 2/8 Worth Co., MO Stephen D. England 2017 204 1/8 217 Woodruff Co., AR Alan L. Schales 2016 203 4/8 208 3/8 Unknown Unknown 1970 203 4/8 208 2/8 Poweshiek Co., IA Dalton M. Hicks 2016 203 1/8 206 4/8 Pontotoc Co., OK Larry J. Wheeler 2017 201 6/8 204 2/8 Licking Co., OH Adam J. Wells 2016 201 4/8 210 2/8 Coshocton Co., OH Lawrence M. 2016 Haberer III 201 1/8 210 7/8 Ringgold Co., IA Daniel L. Towers 2016 201 209 1/8 Pennington Co., MN Wyatt R. Ortloff 2016 200 206 1/8 Dimmit Co., TX Gary S. Farmer 2013 200 208 2/8 McMullen Co., TX Ned R. Garner III 2017 199 1/8 205 4/8 Atchison Co., MO Michael D. Hogue 2016 198 205 2/8 Noble Co., OH Michael M. Van Meter 2016 197 7/8 202 6/8 Crawford Co., WI Ryan R. Justman 2017

J. Olson G. Moore G. Moore S. Moore C. Coburn S. Petkovich E. Hendricks S. Moore D. Boland C. Newcomb D. Doughty D. Boland C. Coburn G. Moore A. Cramer R. Stephen K. Herring R. Dufault C. Faas J. Stein R. Falconer W. Culbertson G. Wegner

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 77

NON-TYPICAL WHITETAIL DEER CONTINUED 196 2/8 200 3/8 Dodge Co., WI Keegan R. Schmitt 2017 M. Miller 195 6/8 205 4/8 Weakley Co., TN Brian L. Clark 2017 S. Brewer 195 5/8 201 6/8 Montague Co., TX Robert B. Haley 2017 J. Gunnels 195 3/8 206 2/8 Nance Co., NE Robert J. Malander 2017 S. Woitaszewski 195 2/8 202 1/8 Pontotoc Co., OK Larry J. Wheeler 2017 G. Moore 194 2/8 202 5/8 Morgan Co., OH Harold L. Hummel, Jr. 2016 G. Wagner 191 6/8 199 Kingman Co., KS Eric M. Clouse 2014 W. Sowards 190 1/8 196 6/8 Reno Co., KS Mark L. Hamele 2017 J. Ramsey 189 1/8 195 7/8 McMullen Co., TX Clifton E. Kotrla 2016 O. Carpenter 189 195 Caddo Co., OK Tyler C. Melton 2017 G. Moore 188 2/8 192 7/8 Clay Co., KS Nicholas C. 2016 K. Kloft Hasbrouck 188 1/8 195 5/8 Hubbard Co., MN Teresa K. Head 2016 T. Rogers 187 1/8 191 7/8 Jefferson Co., IA Ryan R. Bray 2017 B. Nash 186 2/8 189 4/8 Marquette Co., WI Russell C. Rainey 2017 J. Ramsey 185 6/8 193 2/8 Noble Co., IN Eric A. Gienger 2016 W. Novy 185 4/8 189 1/8 Montgomery Co., IA Shane C. Haffner 2016 J. Brummer 185 3/8 187 6/8 Marion Co., MO Brian E. Hobbs 2010 J. Mraz 185 2/8 193 7/8 Carroll Co., MO Jason M. Sandoval 2016 R. Burley

TYPICAL COUES’ WHITETAIL - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 144-1/8 114 7/8 116 4/8 Gila Co., AZ

Justin B. Lewis

2016 T. Mortenson

NON-TYPICAL COUES’ WHITETAIL - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 196-2/8 138 141 7/8 Sonora, MX 121 6/8 124 7/8 Sonora, MX 107 3/8 114 1/8 Catron Co., NM

Scott M. Hill 2017 C. Lacey Ernesto M. Santana 2017 E. Hendricks Timothe R. Bramble 2016 J. Stein

MOOSE AND CARIBOU FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

CANADA MOOSE - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 242 217 5/8 193 3/8 191 6/8 190 2/8 185 3/8

221 3/8 195 7/8 203 193 190 4/8

Unknown Spirit Creek, SK Buckley Lake, BC Swan Lake, BC Quill Lake, SK

Unknown Heath L. Dreger John A. Lovetere Wayne J. Biffert Gerald S. Miskolczi

1984 2017 2004 2017 2017

G. Villnow B. Mitchell T. Montgomery M. Monita C. Kirzinger

ALASKA-YUKON MOOSE - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 266-4/8 244 7/8 251 6/8 241 4/8 242 2/8 229 1/8 232 3/8 215 1/8 225 210 7/8 216 1/8

Tanana Flats, AK Unknown Kuskokwim River, AK Mount Sheldon, YT Sheridan River, AK

Stephen A. McEvoy 2017 J. Pallister John Musser 1954 G. Villnow James D. Unrein 2017 T. Spraker Robert W. Spinks Frank M. Gregersen

2016 R. Ratz 2016 S. Kleinsmith

SHIRAS’ MOOSE - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 205-4/8 183 6/8 158 2/8 153 7/8 146 1/8 142 5/8

190 1/8 159 5/8 160 159 2/8 146 7/8

Okanogan Co., WA Teton Co., WY Ravalli Co., MT Sublette Co., WY Lincoln Co., MT

Paul T. Gann James R. Werner Reneé A. Huddleson Nicole A. Thiele Jeremy C. Koskela

2017 2017 2017 2017 2015

J. Wiggs D. Hart K. Balfourd V. Dana J. Brown

MOUNTAIN CARIBOU - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 459-3/8 425 7/8 438 3/8 Houghton Lake, YT Michael K. Quillin 390 5/8 399 5/8 Palmer Lake, NT Kevin A. Camp 390 401 Orthogonal William J. Ormsbee River, NT

TOP TO BOTTOM:

Stephen A. McEvoy took this Alaska-Yukon moose, scoring 244-7/8 points, in 2017 while on a hunt near Tanana Flats, Alaska. This bison, scoring 116 points, was taken by B&C Associate Mark A. Petroni in Park County, Montana, in 2017. In 2017 while on an archery hunt near Jimmy Lake, Alaska, B&C Associate Edwin L. DeYoung harvested this barren ground caribou, scoring 405-7/8 points. 78 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

2017 L. Carey 2017 C. Smiley 2017 T. Grabowski

WOODLAND CARIBOU - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 419-5/8 337 4/8 353 3/8 335 2/8 350 313 2/8 322 6/8 301 1/8 313 4/8

Bay du Nord Randall W. Ellis Wilderness Res., NL Middle Ridge, NL W. David Howton Cat Arm River, NL Bradley D. Russian Deer Lake, NL James C. Newton

2015 M. Mauney 2016 J. Gunnels 2017 K. Zimmerman 2016 B. Harriman

BARREN GROUND CARIBOU - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 477 410 3/8 428 1/8 Ray Mts., AK 410 418 6/8 Conglomerate Mt., AK

David Benitz Eric C. Winkelman

2014 S. Kleinsmith 2017 B. Richards

BARREN GROUND CARIBOU CONTINUED 405 7/8 412 4/8 Jimmy Lake, AK Edwin L. DeYoung 2017 B. Novosad 390 3/8 401 7/8 Fortymile River, AK Robert E. Schneider 2015 K. Sipes 384 6/8 394 1/8 Coleen River, AK Tad M. Tipton 2017 G. Mefford

QUEBEC-LABRADOR CARIBOU - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 474 6/8 378 2/8 383

Ungava Bay, QC

Allen Bolen

2017 D. Smith

HORNED GAME FINAL GROSS SCORE SCORE LOCATION

HUNTER

DATE MEASURER

PRONGHORN - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 96-4/8 92 2/8 93 6/8 Coconino Co., AZ William S. Weaver 2016 91 6/8 92 4/8 Fremont Co., WY Robert A. Kramer 2016 87 4/8 88 1/8 Coconino Co., AZ Richard G. Wydoski 2017 86 6/8 87 3/8 Lassen Co., CA Jason S. Fookes 2015 86 87 6/8 Modoc Co., CA Alek J. P. Friedrichsen 2017 85 6/8 86 2/8 Elko Co., NV Grant D. Groves 2017 85 2/8 85 7/8 Carbon Co., WY James H. Mason 2017 84 4/8 84 6/8 Coconino Co., AZ Louis J. Horvath 2017 83 6/8 85 4/8 Elko Co., NV Tristan M. Meizel 2017 83 6/8 85 1/8 Sweetwater Co., WY Philip D. Riddle 1970 83 4/8 84 3/8 Washoe Co., NV Sean P. Reiter 2017 83 2/8 84 1/8 Crook Co., WY Robert L. Cleveringa 2017 83 84 4/8 Unknown Unknown 2002 82 6/8 83 3/8 Sweetwater Co., WY Audra H. Thornton 2017 82 4/8 82 7/8 Carbon Co., WY Kyle W. Rutar 2007 82 4/8 82 6/8 Jackson Co., CO Eric D. Stanosheck 2017 82 2/8 82 6/8 Carbon Co., WY David A. Dent 2017 82 2/8 83 5/8 Otero Co., NM John P. O’Dell III 2017 82 82 6/8 Carbon Co., WY Curtis T. Stoddard 2017 82 82 6/8 Moffat Co., CO Pamela S. Coburn 2017 81 4/8 82 3/8 Carbon Co., WY James F. Baichtal 2017 81 2/8 81 6/8 Fremont Co., WY Abbigail J. Faxon 2017 81 81 6/8 Cherry Co., NE Jerod L. Swanson 2017 81 82 Elko Co., NV Justin B. Lewis 2016 80 4/8 82 2/8 Carbon Co., WY J. Mike Clegg 2017 80 4/8 81 2/8 Catron Co., NM Nicholas C. 2017 Bowmaster 80 4/8 82 4/8 Elko Co., NV Robert Padilla 2017 80 80 7/8 Cherry Co., NE Frank E. Safford 2017 80 80 6/8 Elko Co., NV Scott R. Barrett 2017 80 80 7/8 Lander Co., NV Anthony C. Charles 2017 80 80 1/8 Socorro Co., NM Alfred W. Lundquist 2013

R. Stayner R. Stayner D. Doerr S. Boero C. Fritz L. Clark B. Wilkes G. Fabian T. Humes W. Hepworth T. Humes L. Gunner G. Villnow B. Wilkes R. Bonander T. Stanosheck B. Wilkes R. Madsen B. Wilkes T. Caruthers F. King R. Bonander W. Vodehnal T. Mortenson B. Wilkes R. Madsen A. Tiberti R. Krueger L. Clark J. Medici D. Perrien

BISON - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 136-4/8 125 2/8 126 4/8 124 124 6/8 116 2/8 117 7/8 116 117 5/8

Unknown Aishihik Lake, YT Nordenskiold River, YT Park Co., MT

Picked Up Robert W. Spinks Tynan W. Thurmer

1960 G. Villnow 2017 R. Ratz 2017 T. Grabowski

Mark A. Petroni

2017 F. King

ROCKY MOUNTAIN GOAT - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 57-4/8 51 4/8 51 6/8 50 6/8 50 7/8 50 2/8 50 5/8 50 50 50 50 2/8 49 6/8 49 7/8 48 48 4/8 47 6/8 48 3/8 47 6/8 48 47 4/8 47 6/8 47 47 2/8

Swan Lake, AK John C. Burick Babine Mts., BC Curtis L. Gage Duchesne Co., UT Jeffrey F. DeLeeuw Flathead Co., MT Larry J. Larsen, Jr. Point Jeffrey D. Mossop Freemantle, AK Stikine River, BC Chris E. Brough Beaver Co., UT Jeffrey G. Taylor Flathead Co., MT Mike T. McVicker Tsiu River, AK Arlene P. Hanson Flathead Co., MT Larry J. Larsen, Sr. Wolverine River, BC Ryan R. Onufreychuk

2015 2017 2007 2012 2017

D. Larsen C. Mason D. Nielsen J. Williams L. Fulmer

2017 2016 2017 2017 2015 2017

J. Dreibelbis D. Nielsen J. Peterson J. Capurro O. Opre H. Dreger

MUSK OX - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 129 122 6/8 124 Baker Lake, NU 117 2/8 120 4/8 Baker Lake, NU

Gary B. Mefford Logan T. Elliott

2017 E. Parker 2017 E. Parker

TOP TO BOTTOM:

Nicholas C. Bowmaster took this pronghorn, scoring 80-4/8 points, in 2017 while hunting in Catron County, New Mexico.

BIGHORN SHEEP - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 216-3/8

This musk ox, scoring 117-2/8 points, was taken by Logan T. Elliot on a hunt near Baker Lake, Nunavut, in 2017. He was shooting a 7mm Remington Mag.

216 3/8 208 3/8 193 2/8 192 7/8

B&C Regular Member Arlene P. Hanson took this Rocky Mountain goat, scoring 47-6/8 points, in 2017 while hunting near Tsiu River, Alaska. She was shooting a .300 Winchester Short Mag.

217 2/8 209 1/8 195 3/8 193 3/8

Lake Co., MT Chouteau Co., MT Pueblo Co., CO Taos Co., NM

Picked Up Justin D. Sheedy David J. Waldner Richard A. Smith

2016 2017 2017 2017

J. Williams L. Clark R. Newman E. Rominger

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 79

TOP TO BOTTOM:

This Dall’s sheep, scoring 164-5/8 points, was taken by B&C Associate Daniel R. Lilja while hunting the Ruby Range in Yukon Territory, in 2017. He was shooting a 7mm-08. B&C Lifetime Associate Kevin S. Small harvested this desert sheep, scoring 188 points, during the 2017 season while hunting in Socorro County, New Mexico. He was shooting a 7mm Remington Mag. Dennis B. Harms harvested this Stone’s sheep, scoring 165-4/8 points, during the 2017 season while hunting near the Pelly Mountains in Yukon Territory. He was shooting a .260 Remington.

191 7/8 191 6/8 190 2/8 189 5/8 186 183 7/8 183 1/8 180 6/8 177 1/8 176 5/8 175 1/8

192 2/8 192 2/8 191 3/8 190 1/8 186 4/8 184 184 1/8 181 6/8 177 6/8 176 7/8 175 4/8

Chouteau Co., MT James E. McEnroe, Sr. 2017 Taos Co., NM Bradford G. McDavid 2017 Fergus Co., MT Jeffrey Hahn 2017 Teton Co., MT Brendan V. Burns 2015 Big Horn Co., WY Frank M. Lentsch 2017 Madison Co., MT Chad D. Potts 2017 Fergus Co., MT Brian J. Vineyard 2017 Alexander Creek, BC Kip G. Howard 2017 Billings Co., ND Dustin A. Seamands 2017 McKenzie Co., ND Brian S. Ham 2017 Valley Co., ID Timothy B. Bryson 2015

F. King B. Carter E. Headley G. Bettas D. Hart D. Conrad L. Meduna D. Patterson V. Bleich J. Zins M. Demick

DESERT SHEEP - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 205-1/8 188 188 5/8 Socorro Co., NM Kevin S. Small 2017 J. Capurro 178 178 4/8 Mineral Co., NV Matthew W. Duffy 2016 V. Trujillo 173 1/8 173 4/8 San Bernardino Paul D. Osmond 2017 H. Tonkin Co., CA 172 3/8 172 6/8 Kane Co., UT Shawn T. Stolar 2017 K. Zimmerman 168 2/8 168 5/8 Coahuila, MX Amie B. Harris 2017 D. Waechtler 168 1/8 168 2/8 La Paz Co., AZ Michael J. Rusing 2016 P. Dalrymple 165 7/8 166 7/8 Sonora, MX Kenneth H. Jones 2017 R. Hall

DALL’S SHEEP - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 189-6/8 174 2/8 174 7/8 173 6/8 174 172 6/8 173 3/8 171 5/8 171 6/8 171 171 4/8 170 7/8 171 5/8 164 5/8 165 2/8

Twin Lakes, AK Chugach Mts., AK Windy Fork River, AK Tok River, AK Alaska Range, AK Kusawa Lake, YT Ruby Range, YT

William F. Murphy Bennie J. Rossetto Charles B. Mager

2000 W. DiSarro 2017 D. Conrad 2017 M. Weinzen

Jesse J. Hoffman E.B. & W.M. Williams John B. Vogt Daniel R. Lilja

2017 2017 2016 2017

F. Noska F. Noska P. Deuling E. Buckner

STONE’S SHEEP - WORLD’S RECORD SCORE 196-6/8 171 5/8 171 3/8 165 4/8 162 6/8

172 4/8 171 7/8 165 6/8 163 4/8

ABOVE:

Muskwa River, BC Hart River, YT Pelly Mts., YT Primrose Mt., YT

Sheldon B. Romain A.C. Smid Dennis B. Harms Roger D. Vanderhoff

2016 2017 2017 2017

T. Cody V. Bleich F. King J. Capurro

B&C Associate Brendan V. Burns took this bighorn sheep, scoring 189-5/8 points, in 2015 while bow hunting in Teton County, Montana.

80 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

Since 1901, Boyt Harness Company has craed high quality hunting apparel and accessories preferred by generations. Our lifestyle clothing captures the true spirit of the outdoors with a rugged, go anywhere conﬁdence woven into every garment. With the Upland Scout Hunting Shirt, you will ﬁnd they are perfect for so many occasions beyond hunting. e vibrant colors and classic styles are sure to stand out when you aren't trying to blend in.

Building upon a 100 year tradition of providing the ultimate protection for fine firearms, Boyt’s Hard-Sided Travel Cases are built using a custom formulated resin that holds up to the toughest world wide hunting and travel conditions. An industry first all steel draw latch keeps the cases closed and tight while high density, easy to customize foam accommodates a variety of firearm shapes, styles, and sizes. ese cases are made in the U.S.A. and are backed by Boyt Harness Company’s famous lifetime warranty.

e Pica Zuro shirt is named aer Pica Zuro Lodge, a wing shooter's paradise in the heart of Argentina's Cordoba region. In honor of the region's famous dove shooting, we have created the perfect shirt for warm weather hunting. Constructed of a light weight synthetic fabric that wicks away moisture for quick dry performance, the Pica Zuro shirt has a vented back that let's you keep your cool when the shooting gets hot. Available in long sleeve or short sleeve in new rich, earth tone colors. e perfect companion for wherever the weather is warm, from Argentina to Alabama to Africa.

Start your hunting season oﬀ right with quality products that truly show you live for the hunt.

www.boytharness.com FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 81

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

82 FA I R CH A S E | SU M M E R 20 1 8

FAIR CHASE | SUM M E R 2 0 1 8 83

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