Nope, Teddy Roosevelt said that. Whew..If I said that, man, I could really piss off a slew of guys here who I know go on guided hunts (myself included, albiet it on the low end for pig hunts). I realize a lot of guys save their nickels and dimes to go on a guided hunt and aren't rich, so no, that's not what I was saying.
What Teddy DID say, at least how I understand those words, is that paying big $$ (he used the term rich) for big game hunting would be to the demise of big game hunting. And BTW, I would agree with that. The last thing I'd want to see for our Mule deer and Elk in Colorado, Utah, etc., is what has happened out here in Calif. on wild pig hunts. That is, a good 90% of the pigs are on private land, and almost all of the private land hunting rights are leased out to hunting guides. For people of lesser means, they will never be able to hunt a pig, or maybe once in a lifetime, which is a shame with all the pigs they have in the central coast. What I wish were the case would be that hunters would be welcomed onto private land to help reduce the numbers of pigs for the landowners and sharecroppers. But nope, money got involved...
This could get into a real spitting contest, and that's not why I asked the question. I just asked because if prohunter is a guide (I think he is), guides take money (as you know, sometimes a LOT of it for Muleys and Elk hunts, I think that falls into the category of the quote, along with using a guide to find the critter and for the most part, the "hunter" would be better described as the "shooter") and it just seemed like a wierd quote from a guide (IF that's the case). Remember, not judging, I just was asking.....
Hope that makes sense....