Ooyyy....another Campfire topic over which, it seems to me, that reasonable men may differ...
In reading this thread, I searched the internet for a definition of "trophy", and,aside from the term's Greek/Latin origins, naturally enough found numerous references to the preservation of animal parts (and particularly the mounting of heads),serving as momentos of the hunt, or achievements associated there with. To wit.,..."anything taken in war, hunting,competition,etc.,especially when preserved as a momento".
And further,..."a carving,painting,or
other representation of objects associated with victory or achievement . A keepsake,remembrance,reminder,souvenir, or token.
Could this include a portfolio of photos? I fail to see why not.
I saw nothing saying that it has to take a particular form,or that it had to cost a certain amount of money. It seems to me that we are entitled to spend as little,or as much,on these "trophies" as our means allow, or that we see fit,so long as they remind us of the experiences we attained in their acquisition.We are free to choose how we go about this because the animals is owed a duty of honor only by the person lucky enough to have killed it.We honor it in our own way.
Hunters are comprised from a broad spectrum of socio-economic backgrounds and a bighorn sheep is no less valuable, nor diminished because it was taken on a solo back pack hunt in a special draw unit by a working guy than it was if killed on a $30,000+ hunt by someone who worked hard to afford the hunt. If the solo hunter chooses not to mount the ram,gives the cleaned skull and horns an honored place in the loading room to remind him of the hunt,the significance of the experience is not reduced and neither is the ram. It's remains are reminders of the experiences that resulted in its' killing.....the same goes for an 8 point whitetail from a Wisconsin woodlot or a Lord Derby eland from Camaroon.
If, OTOH, the hunter chooses to spend $8-$10,000 on a fully mounted Alaskan Brown bear or Desert Sheep, who are we to judge his motives?
In the end, after the hunting is over,all we really have are the memories anyway.No amount of money will replace them. Preserve them as you will. Just my opinion on the matter.
It has been quite awhile since I read Gassett and do not remember it all.But my own interpretation of the famous phrase is that with hunting we are engaging in a predator /prey relationship with the quarry.And if we do not have the purpose and intent of killing it we are engaging in observation only,not hunting. Those folks who have done both understand the difference, and those who only observe will never understand, no matter how we try to explain it.
