Slightly large Elk...

[Joe_Lorenzini]

World record actually...

http://www.boone-crockett.org/news/f...rea=news&ID=36

[JohnT]

Too bad it was gunned down. No one else will get to enjoy the sight of this magnificent animal.

Edit: By the way, I am not anti-hunting. I just think that all would have been better served if this big guy had been left alone—another one of those joys of nature left to be appreciated.

[Kalrog]

The only reason Elk (or deer or ...) get this big is that we (hunters) manage the populations/environment better and provide the opportunity for them to thrive like that. Besides, I bet it would taste mighty fine next to some taters.

If you eat steak or any other meat, you have contributed to doing worse to animals.

[Frazzled LaShawn]

AWESOME. My husband will be green with envy when he sees that!

Elk is mighty tasty!

[dtscds]

I wouldn't mind the "hunting makes the animal population better" argument so much if it weren't for the fact that the hunters seem to go after the best of the species. That way they can't reproduce! Why not do as predatory animals do and go for the week and scrawny?
I know they don't look as impressive stuffed on the wall but wouldn't that actually make the herd stronger instead of taking out the alpha males? Are we really trying to help out the population or stroke our egos with a trophy? Just wondering...
The "you eat meat so you are part of the problem" argument doesn't really apply since I am not looking to have the prize bull butchered so I can have a burger.

[Frazzled LaShawn]

The "you eat meat so you are part of the problem" argument doesn't really apply since I am not looking to have the prize bull butchered so I can have a burger.

I do not see how it matters if you are butchering a prize bull or if you are eating meat off of a cow that was born, bred and slaughtered in a 10x10 stall.

Hunters have done more for conservation, animal rights, and land management than anyone else that I know of. They have been doing it since long before it became fashionable. If they have one or two trophy animals on their wall that doesn't mean they are any less committed to seeing the best of the species go on. If the species deteriorates what would they hunt?

[tomdrink]

Originally Posted by dtscds

I wouldn't mind the "hunting makes the animal population better" argument so much if it weren't for the fact that the hunters seem to go after the best of the species. That way they can't reproduce! Why not do as predatory animals do and go for the week and scrawny?

If you read in the story, you would see that there are more of "the best", by following wildlife conservation principles. You need to manage wildlife, so as to promote a healthy, and better quality, population. The "weAk, and scrawny" are removed (hunted), to produce more, and higher quality animals in the wild.
It is definitely a science, and has proven successful all over the country.

Tom in TX

[dtscds]

Originally Posted by Frazzled LaShawn

I do not see how it matters if you are butchering a prize bull
<snip>
If they have one or two trophy animals on their wall that doesn't mean they are any less committed to seeing the best of the species go on.

Maybe I'm just not very smart! I just fail to see how taking out the "best of the species" is HELPING the species. As I originally stated, I would have no problem with hunting if you were doing it as nature does--the predators go after the weak not the strongest. I completely understand how taking out the week makes the species better.

(Taking out the best + leaving the weak to reproduce = better gene pool) has never been an equation I understood.

[Frazzled LaShawn]

You are under the impression that hunters ONLY take out the top animals.

Many times they take out the ones that are getting to an older age (where genetic mistakes are MORE likely to happen). Also, in most hunting reserves measures ARE made to take out those that are not genetically ideal. You just aren't going to see those on someone's wall or on a hunting show.

[CaptainG]

Originally Posted by JohnT

Too bad it was gunned down. No one else will get to enjoy the sight of this magnificent animal.

Actually, many more people will be able to see this animal. It is probable that it was reaching the end of its life in any case and no doubt, will be featured at a Bass Pro Shop or a Cabella's.

[C!LLY]

that is impressive. I wonder if the animal rights groups are going to attack this man like they did that kid that shot that huge hog.

[nastytrucker]

I guess since he shot it on public land he wont have to pay any "Trophy Fees" for it. I just cant justify paying some of those ridiculous trophy fees some of the ranches have. $15,000 to shoot a deer? I should be able to hunt people like those crazy billionaires on their remote islands in the south pacific for that much money.

[Davidtxs]

No political statement here but man thats a BIG BULL

[Crashoran]

Originally Posted by Kalrog

The only reason Elk (or deer or ...) get this big is that we (hunters) manage the populations/environment better and provide the opportunity for them to thrive like that. Besides, I bet it would taste mighty fine next to some taters.

If you eat steak or any other meat, you have contributed to doing worse to animals.

The irony in this..

[JamesB]

Originally Posted by Kalrog

The only reason Elk (or deer or ...) get this big is that we (hunters) manage the populations/environment better and provide the opportunity for them to thrive like that.

That is the typical answer all hunters use as an excuse to kill an animal. They really need a better excuse, like we are poor, out of a job and hungry and need to eat, or we are tired of paying the grocery store for meat.

Nature will take care of the animal population with out the aide of humans trying to "Manage" them.

James