Is raffle tag as bad as auction tag?

B

bubbas

Guest
First off this thread is not an attack on a particular person but rather a rhetorical question to initiate introspection.

A raffle hunter just shot a monster bull in a western state. He hunted very hard and eventhough he won the tag at considerably less cost than the equal auction tag, he obviously invested a lot of time and money in his hunt. He hunted hard almost a whole year to realize his goal of harvesting a record size animal. In the end he achieved this goal with a large amount of hard work, scouting, and guiding from a local outfitter. Other than some random comments of disgust over the time of year the animal was shot I have not read any negative flack from any posters here. I am curious as to why this case is different than an auction tag holder who spent A LOT of his own money and often times spends the same amount of time and puts the same amount of hard work into the same hunt and yet the hunter and the guides who guided him get a large amount of negative publicity?

Is it a case of money envy? Is it because the raffle tag holder is a frequenter on this site and the readers feel like they know his character and feel better about him? If that is the case, how do they know a rich, auction tag holder doesn't frequent this site under an anonymous name and is respected? I am curious of the differences because on the surface the circumstances seem the same and yet the way people are judged and treated are different. Should it matter if money is exchanged for services? Because believe me the outfitter in this case stands a lot to gain from their "help" and I have a hard time believing it was donated 100% without anticipating some type of publicity.

Please do not turn this into a personal bashing because these threads are meant for discussion as the forum implies. I already know many have axes to grind and will respond to this/me negatively. Not about me, just curious about how people perceive this. I for one feel there is a great deal of hypocrisy and hate against people and I feel it's wrong.
 
Interesting question. I, like you, am happy to see how well received the hunt and bull was on here. I see no rhyme or reason why some hunt posts tank and go south on here, while others go over well.

To answer your question, I think we all think of the rich guy as one that pays to get everything he wants. While the raffle tag holder is considered more an "average Joe" much like we perceive ourselves to be. We are suckers for the underdog I suppose. I realize that not all rich guys are lazy slob hunters since many are dedicated sportsmen that contribute a lot of time and money to their passion of trophy bucks and bulls.

One has to be pretty thick skinned in life, especially on the net. Trust me, if I had the money, there would be a lot of animals hitting the dirt. Don't worry, I would post all my pics on here too!
48894d531ea52117.jpg


4678aec03a21ae00.jpg
 
First off I would like the title changed. How is a raffle tag hunter bad? They have the money and they spend it. It goes to conservation and they get a special hunt. Just like the raffle tag brings in a ton of money through the public as a whole. If you did not have the raffle or auction tags how much money could an organization raise? Some but not much. Friends of mine guided the hunter you are talking about and basically for free. So if I won a raffle tag I would be excited just like anyone else would. We cannot portray an auction tag hunter or a raffle tag hunter as bad. I think you need to rephrase your title. John
 
+1 chef,

I think it is also our disgust about seeing our passion and way of life more often than not becoming a rich mans sport. Im sure whom ever wins an auction tag worked very hard to get the money they have and can spend it how they wish. We all need to be greatful that they see fit to use it to benifit our wildlife also. Arizona's tag this year went for what? $195,000? thats alot of benifit to our elk herds. We all take our chances with the drawing and see no different with a raffle except unbelievable chances and unbelievably ridiculous odds. As for the auction tag it shows us money can buy things and other people do have the upper hand. whats a 420" bull if you have the money and time to get it? Not near as difficult as hunting one in one or two weeks not to mention keepin track of him after finding him the whole preseason. thats bout my take on it.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -- Abraham Lincoln
 
Chef,
Great post. I agree. So if this is true then I have another thought. You said, "I think we all think of the rich guy as one that pays to get everything he wants. While the raffle tag holder is considered more an "average Joe" much like we perceive ourselves to be." I happen to agree wholeheartedly with this comment as to the general perception of people. So my question is, what is wrong with the rich guy "paying to get everything he wants"? Isn't that why he busted his behind off to make that money. Don't we work to have our necessities in life but then also to have the luxuries or comforts we desire to some extent. Just because someone has more resources to afford more luxuries does not make that person any less than the average joe who spends within his own means to enjoy what he likes to do.

In fact, in many cases I have more respect for the person with more resources as they have paid their dues, invested a lot of sacrifice, and had an immense amount of discipline to achieve their goals. They should be able to enjoy it without prejudice and malice.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-24-08 AT 10:17PM (MST)[p]John,
I agree. I personally don't see one or the other as bad. Some do however look at the auction tag as bad as it allows the "rich" man to buy what they want. First off it is a question, not a statement. I didn't know how else to ask the question in a short space. Any suggestions?
 
BigWooley,

I think there are many examples of over exploitation in our society and we see that over all and are starting to get sick of it and what it may lead to. What I would rather see is an attack on the system and not not personal attacks on those who use it. Remember, we as a community are responsible for the system they are just taking advantage of. Someone will always do that if it is in place. We need to change the system if we don't like it. You may even find those with the most resources to be the biggest part of that change.
 
Bubba's,

I dont dislike the system at all. My comment is an idea on why some may look down on it. As i stated most of the people got their money through hard work. there is really no way possible to raise that kind of money for each single species other than folks that got it to spend. I think both are great conservation efforts in the best interest of wildlife and ourselves. Sure people complain about it....cuz they cant do it, everyone gets jealous but hell anyone of us would kill for a tag like that. As for the part about taking large bulls. I do believe an average guy with a regular tag that took 7 years to draw will need to put up alot more effort to take a bull commonly taken off of one of the auction/raffle tags. its common sense 1 week to hunt and 1 year to hunt. whether services are used or not. I think the bull is in most cases in the end much more deserved by the guy that put the work in and had no upper hand for whatever reason good or bad. I personally would be much happier with a bull i took battling crowds/time frames/weather/terrain than a bull i took after passing nice bulls repeatedly and hunting wherever i wanted because i could. I know that cuz i have a tag and ive been chasin elk since i drew when the hunt aint til nov....but thats what it takes.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -- Abraham Lincoln
 
I understand the benefits of money and what one can do with it. I also commend the many that work hard for what they have and they surely deserve what they can buy with it. The way I look at it, these guys can buy a ton of other things and/or donate to different causes. I greatly appreciate the fact that they choose to help preserve wildlife habitat.

I can see how many can be envious of the rich. It must be nice to have the homes, the cars, the chicks, the boats, you name it. Heck, you don't even have to be rich nowadays with credit cards and money loans. Luckily for many of us here, we live within our means. We know the value of a hard days work and the value of a dollar. Many have mouths to feed and obligations that keep us from hitting the hills like we would love to do. So with that, we are more in tune with the raffle winners.

I am sure there are forums out on the world wide web for guys that talk about what they bought that week. If we open our eyes and look around, there are a lot of people with a lot of money amongst us. Like I said, I'm happy a few spend it on our sport and "way of life".

4678aec03a21ae00.jpg
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-24-08 AT 10:52PM (MST)[p]I agree with last post but would like to add something. Most of the auction holders are ALSO spending within their means because their means are higher. No difference. It just so happens that they are spending within their means and it is benefiting conservation. They also are doing a lot of non-hunting donating.

I agree a trophy animal harvested by someone after hard work and without the services of others is probably harder, more rewarding, and definitely the way i hunt but when it comes down to it the rich people or those who guide them should not be punished for what they are doing. Now if you know them personally, and they are jerks then by all means, drink the haterade!

Also, in reference to this, "So with that, we are more in tune with the raffle winners." Isn't it possible to be in "tune" or relate to one group without saying disparaging remarks about the other? That is all I am saying. The majority of us, me included relate with the average joe but those who have greater means are not bad because they spend their money doing something they love and can afford to spend alot of money on.
 
By "living within means" I wasn't referring to the rich guy. I was referring to the credit debt rich guy. Sorry for the mix up.

4678aec03a21ae00.jpg
 
I understood but I guess my point was the rich are also spending within their means after most times hard work, just to emphasize they aren't so different than the average joe other than how much they make because they have the ability to do so.
 
I come from a perspective where I make a good living but nowhere near the living to be able to afford these auction/conservation tags. I work VERY hard in a very stressfull environment to make that living. I had to sacrifice a lot of years of not hunting like i wanted in order to realize this. That is what I just chose to do because I felt it was the best way to provide for my family and maybe end up being to better afford the things I enjoy. That came at a cost and I was fortunate enough to be able to do it. I understand everyone has different paths and maybe their path or circumstances don't provide the same "opportunities". Again this may be due to choice or circumstances other than their own. Either way, the person that has the means to do what they enjoy and put in just as much sacrifice or maybe even more scarifice than someone with lesser means should not be judged negatively for it, in my opinion.
 
Bubbas,

Don't know who you are talking about, but I will tell you many of wealth Western Hunters you read and heard about and some not have had great luck in the Oregon raffles over the years.

I think the media i.e. video's have played a big part in many people forming negative opinions as well as the commercialization of public wildlife/Utah elk.In addition you can't deny the cost to hunt continues to rise causing a perception of a rich mans game. I think prejudice and malice in your description of how these folks are viewed is too strong, probably jealous is better. I have no problem with these folks as long as they and their resources stay out of my path. However regarding more respect for the person who is able to bring more resources to the table I disagree, at some point "Resources" will become a "Fair Chase" issue for B&C. JB JMHO
 
JB,
You bring up a couple great points. One, I think media plays a huge part in this. It definitely is not unique to hunting industry either. Look at professional sports and how the climate of athlete perception is changing. I thought it was comical when there was a big media mentioning when Terrell Owens showed some concern over someone who got hit by a car. First, why should he be made out to be a great person when it is what any decent human being should do? Second, why were they, the media, suprised when he did show concern? But these are the perceptions created due to a "Mega Media" environment. We actually are contributing to it right now....LOL.

The "Fair Chase" point is a tuff one. I think it is going that way. Actually there are already some rules in place that I feel are "society status" driven but that is another topic.

Lastly, I too feel ultimately it is a jealousy issue. Either way not good.
 
I have stated before that it is a jealousy issue. and any one of us would take the tag if we had the resources. as for the original question it comes down to average joe and money. as for ethics i think that a bull taken buy a normal guy however he got the tag should be based on a level playing field. not a year to hunt where ever you want. That is not a level playing field. As for score i personally dont care. i will take a bull i like for whatever reason i like him for. right now its a nice bull thats all scared up and looks really old. i figure hes old and smart and id like to try to beat him on his own turf. But really how is a record book legitimate if it includes bulls that were not taken on level ground with everyone else. ANYONE can take a 400+ with the money and the time, givin they have opportunity to hunt proper country. IMO how is a book legit if green score matters.....yall know what book i mean....and a certified scorer takes the animal....in a different continent? same idea. How are we supposed to see them at our level of hunting when there is that level of difference?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." -- Abraham Lincoln
 
Intriguing thread here, and a subject I've personally debated for a long time. While both raffle and auction permits no doubt raise many much needed management dollars, both afford an opportunity not available to the majority of us. The raffle permits are generally a one time deal for a lucky guy that throws in a few low dollar tickets and hopes for the best while competing with all other entrants. There is no certainty in the process as opposed to an auction where the most willing can continue bidding until he/she wears out the competition. Often the participants number fewer than a half dozen, and it gets down to a couple people that are willing to monetarily slug it out to the finish.

I personally find the raffle tags to be more palatable than the auction tags because the average person has a fighting chance to win one, and most likely they'll only win once in a lifetime, if that. Auction tags have gone to repeat buyers a number of times, and it's especially evident in the sheep hunting circle. With adequate resources, a willing bidder can buy permits as often as they're available and offered. The checkbook and willingness to spend being the only limitation. These same checkbooks are also capable of influencing raffles too, but there still will be many other players in the mix. There are tax benefits to buying an auction tag, and the lust to buy them is often justified by saying "I'm doing something good for conservation and management". That wears thin and weak when I see anybody buying multiple permits at auction. I think a bloodthirst, ego, and a desire to kill is really the true motivation, but the auction process has a built in excuse that allows this to happen. If funding conservation and management is the real motivation, I question why most big animals taken on auction, or raffle, hunts find their way onto the covers of the various hunting publications?

If high dollar auction winners really are supporting the conservation and management of their favorite species, why not continue to buy permits and then donate them via the transfer process for somebody less fortunate to enjoy one time?? There are numerous organizations that facilitate programs for sick kids especially. Rather than stack up trophies to repugnant levels, why not support the G&F agencies and also help those less fortunate too? At some point, even the most wealthy must have a sense of when "enough is enough". I could hold this sort of auction participant in much higher esteem.

As far as a level playing field when comparing high scoring animals, I certainly agree that is needed. We currently have record keeping organizations that track different methods of take, and it seems an easy thing to create a separate listing/book for auction and raffle animals. Or easier yet, just do not allow or consider them for entry in the current records. These permits offer a favorably unequal opportunity for those holding the permits, and they are sold under the premise of funding conservation and management.

My above thoughts and opinions may or may not be agreeable to many, and who's to say if they are right or wrong. All I know is that there's a giant glitch in the current situation, and it doesn't feel very good to me. I do think that the 2007 AZ Raffle Tag guy is a "regular" sort of hunter that got fortunate and made the most of his opportunity under the rules he was asked to play by. He seemed to have enjoyed the chase moreso than the result, and I applaud and congratulate him for that. HOGLIQUOR....
 
Hog,

I enjoyed reading your post. Got a few minutes here. That is an interesting thought on having a seperate record book/section for auction/raffle/or conservation tags. Would you also do it for reservations and/or private ranches (not high fenced). These places also provide unequal hunting opportunities that many can't afford....where do we draw the line?

I have to disagree with your thoughts on an auction tag holder bidding and winning tags multiple times, only because it is not a once in a lifetime deal. If the repeat buyer doesn't bid then some other guy with lots of maney is going to every year so it equates to a trophy animal being killed every year just the same. Why should we be concerned if one guy gets to do it multiple times? Affects the herds and public the same. DOes he not have the right to enjoy the fruits of his labor as much as he wants? I would venture to guess that the auction tag holders themselves would not even claim that they are buying the tag for the purpose of charity. No they are spending the money that they can afford so they can do what they have a passion for. It just so happens that that money then goes towards helping wildlife. Is this bad? Again should we care what their motivations are for doing it? Should we expect someone to donate 1-2 hundred thousand dollars a year to wildlife without getting any benefit in return (besides idealistic "good feeling" benefit). That is idealistic and easy to say when we are not the one having to do that.

Also if you limited the times one could buy a tag you could potentially eliminate competition in the auction process thereby driving down the monies brought in for the tag and then we all loose.

I feel it is an all or nothing process. Either the system is good and is a benefit for the wildlife and hunting community or it is not. Motivations should not come into play. ultimately if we are concerned about motivations or how much another person gets out of the process then it is a jealousy or vanity issue (seeing someone higher up in record books then someone else).

I don't know if you could seperate animals in the books due to reasons above but I wouldn't necessarliy be opposed. It would most likely get shot down due to complexities though.
 
Hey, bubbas.
Just caught your comments regarding my original post on this subject. I pretty well laid my hand on the table as to what I feel on the topic, and I certainly have no need or desire to get into a long running philosophical debate here. I'm not looking to be found right or wrong, just relating my opinion. I would be interested in your position very much, and look forward to reading it. Hopefully you'll tell us what you think on the matter, and maybe without so many rhetorical questions?

I think you're trying to maybe play the role of debate moderator/facilitator and to inspire thought and discussion on the subject?? If so, you are certainly provoking thought from me..

Just to address a couple points, and then I'm out of this one...

1) Given a choice, I would draw the record keeping line at the auction and raffle tags, and set those entrys off to compete amongst themselves. While reservation and private lands are exclusive to many, they are way more available to most. As such, you or I could probably fork over the money required to attempt taking a trophy animal if we really wished to do so.

2) I recognize the value of the dollars raised through both raffles and auctions, and I feel that I benefit from those dollars through management projects. I do not believe that the harvesting of these auction and raffle critters has any significant biological impact on the overall resource, and that their genes have been passed on many times before they were/are harvested.

3) Making raffle and auction permits a "once in a lifetime" thing would be for the overall good, and a way to eliminate overkill by anybody. As with many "once in a lifetime" permits, this applies to harvest only. Buy as many times as you want, but only kill once.


Best wishes as this thread continues to build.

HOG.
 
I have asked this question before,and have never received an answer.What is an average joe? Hog we can't assume just because someone buys a auction tag that they don't hunt on their own. The fact that they are ambitious enough to EARN their money sure as hell should'nt disqualify them from anything.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-08 AT 04:33PM (MST)[p]First, why is either tag a bad tag? I don't like your title either because it seemingly assumes that the auction tag is bad and the raffle tag might be as well? The system is put in place to generate the funds for wildlife, both tags should be looked upon equally in accomplishing this goal without negativity. We should all thank the person who purchased the auction tag, as well as whoever purchased raffle tickets for contributing to wildlife.

Why do these questions always come up after such an animal is harvested? Jealousy maybe, opportunity yes, but that's the gift the hunter was given with such a special tag. We're all jealous of someone else's opportunity whether its buying the auction tag directly, or winning the raffle tag. But it disappoints me that we all think this is a bad thing when it is not.

Its those that abuse the system by breaking the law during the hunt that should be considered bad, on a single individual basis, not the tag. It's disappointing whenever anyone even alludes to these tags as being bad, its negative for our sport and only divides us and hurts us in the long run. If you don't like the manner in which the animal was harvested (if legally), then push for a change in the law, but don't say the tag is bad, they're there for a good reason and we all know it.

The hunter in the example you're alluding to put in his work and passed on numerous 400 class bulls. I have utmost repect for the guides as well and commend them. We should all be in envy and give our respect to the hunter and the guides, and negativity should be avoided. We should be greatful that hunters, guides, and friends can all come together in harvesting such a magnificent animal.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-08 AT 05:11PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jul-25-08 AT 05:07 PM (MST)

Hog,

I'll try to clarify my own personal feelings on the subjects, although I will say that my intent on the post wasn't to debate the validity of the tags but rather expose or discuss the biases that many people have towards those that have lots of money and hire guides to help them. Especially when the exact thing just took place for the recent AZ raffle tag holder, only he did not "Pay" the guides for their help.

Having said that here are some of my opinions. But you know what they say about those. I do not feel the tags are not bad on the overall herd qualities in most cases. That's why I am ok with the tags because I take into account the "greater good". I feel what they bring in for income is greater than the loss of one of the larger animals. Even if this means doing so in July....although I admit I am a little on the fence on the year long thing.

I would probably be Ok with separating these animals in the books, although I don't really think it should matter. I don't hunt so I can have my name higher up on the list than someone else, nor do I care how he did it as long as it was legal. I look at the books to recognize the animal and the information it tells me like where and when it was killed.

I still don't quite understand the value in making the auction tags "once in a lifetime". You said in your third point,
"3) Making raffle and auction permits a "once in a lifetime" thing would be for the overall good, and a way to eliminate overkill by anybody. As with many "once in a lifetime" permits, this applies to harvest only. Buy as many times as you want, but only kill once."

How can there be overkill by one person here. They may harvest multiple animals but it is only one animal per year. Whether it be them or someone else who wins the bid it still equates to one animal being killed, thus I don't see the overkill-unless you just meant that you don't think someone should have the privilege to shoot 1 or more animals over a lifetime. But I don't see why that matters. It's not like there are so many people bidding on these tags that some new bidder can't get in the game. If they want to bid they can bid. If you say well one guy is willing to spend more than the other thus "cornering the market" and keeping others from jumping then I would say....Isn't this the purpose of the auction to raise as much money as one tag can garnish? Still, the fact is this isn't a problem anyways because unfortunately there aren't enough people who can afford these tags. Help me to see the benefit of limiting the auction opportunities. Maybe I am overlooking something.

I do feel that the conservation tags do have some MINOR negative impact on the hunting heritage. They help contribute to the over-exploitation of the animals which is mostly caused by the rapidly increasing media exploitation. Think about it, if you eliminated all the media outlets we have today within hunting compared to 30 years ago we would not have all this negative energy within the community because we wouldn't even know about the stuff going on. It is really bad and unfortunately a serious problem in all aspects of our society. Personal attacks caused by many different reasons including jealousy, greed and vanity are way too rampant.

Hog, I enjoy your thoughts. Hope you aren't a stranger.
 
Raffle Tag: Available to anyone who can afford to buy it.

Auction Tag: Available to anyone who can afford to buy it.

They are equal in every way other than price. It matters not that one usually sells for thousands and sometimes even 6 figure prices. That is the intent of having an auction tag... sold to the highest bidder. It also matters not if the auction winner is the same person every year. If Bill Gates decided he really wanted to kill a trophy animal I'm sure he would create the opportunity for himself. Good for him. Good for the state he chose to hunt in. It is a win win situation.

Bubbas, I also have read posts that made me raise an eyebrow to the person who made silly biased comments in line with what you are asking about. Every forum I read has at least one individual that has chicken little syndrome and feels a need to vent about something and it does not seem to matter if it makes any sense or not. My opinion on your question is, "who cares"? This is America!

There are intelligent people everywhere with various incomes and the opposite is also true. I have hunting partners that are of average income and I have hunting partners with income far above average. A person's income has nothing to do with who they are as a hunter and citizen. They could both be great stewards of our land and resources or they could be unethical. You are fueling a fire that can only burn with the fuel provided from an outside source. Personally I choose to ignore the comments of some that don't deserve commenting on.

You are well spoken and seem to be well educated by reading your posts. Does that mean that you are a Princeton graduate with a seven figure + income who got his feelings hurt because you bought an auction tag and harvested a great animal in July; posted a picture and story on MM and got bashed because of it? I doubt that's true but I can see where someone could get that impression.

If you don't like the contents of a post or find it offensive, ignore it.

The only reason I'm commenting on this is because it's pouring rain outside and I'm bored.... :)



"WIndage & Elevation Pilgrim, Windage & Elevation"
 
Hello Gambler,

Every once in a while I get a thought and it makes me go hmmmm. SO I just opened it up to discussion. Mostly to take my mind off of what I should be doing!

I am not fortunate enough to buy auction tag, unfortunately, because you can bet I would.

The thread was born out of an observation of the events surrounding the recent AZ raffle bull being killed. I enjoy looking at the pics and reading the stories behind the kill.... but then I got wondering. hmmmm I wonder WHY no negative comments towards this guy? I was glad to see that because I don't think he would deserve them but if it were the auction guy who shot the bull we would have gotten some negative posts towards the hunter. I just like observing the human psyche sometimes and decided to pose the question, again, for some possible introspection.
 
Id personally rather see a long shot "average joe" hunter get a raffle tag then a high roller buy an auction tag every year. I think auction tags go against the very principles of game conservation that our forefathers established and is more in line with European ideals. If a raffle tag raises the same amount of money as an auction tag then why should the wealthy get special preferance for a high demand public animals?
ismith

48461bbc1c983664.jpg
 
Gambler
I purchased a rifle tag his year ,through the auction,

I am by no means wealthy as i have worked hard all my life to save and make smart decisions to get to where i am today financially .

I have saved for years to go on this hunt.
.
I come from a family of all working class people.

God has blessed me and my family beyond measure.

I chose to by the auction tag because i did not want to wait 10 years to draw the tag and while i am physically able i want to enjoy the hunt.

I have also been on several hunts and spent money that was a
total bust.

I some times hear reports on here of people criticizing others about buying auction or Landowner tags.

I would say until you walk in there shoes and know everything about that person dont be so quick to judge others.

I hope all of your hunting dreams come true.......

Bullmania
 
Mo said:

"The fact that they are ambitious enough to EARN their money sure as hell should'nt disqualify them from anything".

Thats one of the best arguements I have ever heard. Very well
said.
 
I don't think any tags should be sold at an auction. Unless I win the LOTTERY tonight, then they should increase the number of tags auctioned!
 
This may have been mentioned before since I haven't carefully read the entire thread but here goes. My concern with auction tags is where do they stop? If you can make $200k with one why not do 5 and get $1,000,000? What if the state decided to give 1/2 the LE tags to the highest bidders and only 1/2 in the draw? Maybe in Utah you could have better seasons and get $2000/tag for elk? Once the state decides that the money is more important than the opportunity for the public most of us won't be able to hunt anymore. Utah could very easily get 4 times as much money out of the tags as they do now if you could buy better odds. Where do we draw the line on money vs opportunity? Don't think it won't happen. It wasn't very long ago that the first tag was auctioned off and it was only one tag in one state. Now how many tags are taken out of the public pool for auctions, raffles, expos, etc? I'm already figuring out how I'll explain to my grandson that he'll get to hunt trophy quality animals once every 15 - 20 years if he's lucky.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom