Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Elk Hunting Why doesn't B&C list calibers used for elk

Maybe it's there but I couldn't find it.

Because it has nothing to do with antler size, which is the whole purpose of B&C.

They don't, but if you mean cartridges they do kind of have that information on hand--or at least they used to, though often in a general way. They started adding "caliber" to the info on record-book heads in 1980, but only in their computer.

When they were planning to publish the 10th edition of Records of North American Big Game, which appeared in 1993, one of the guys on the measuring committee was the late Walter White, who happened to be a hunting buddy of mine. Walter asking me to do a chapter on the subject, and provided the information they had. (The editor chose to call it "The Caliber of Record," but the editor wasn't very knowledgeable about firearms.)

I analyzed the info they had on their computer, which was often generic, such as listing all 7mm or .300 magnums as the same basic round. At that time .300 magnums led the American elk category with 26, with 7mm magnums at 22, .30-06 at 21, and .270 at 19. Various .338s were far down the list at 7.

The Roosevelt elk list was headed by the .30-06 at 36, then ".303" at 14, and 7mm magnum 11.

If you can find a used copy (a Google search found them available for $15 to $35) the results are interesting. For example, the list of the rounds used for three of the four North American sheep is headed by ".270". In the fourth category, Stone's sheep, ".270" came in a close second to "7mm Magnum."

Great post!

I have an old outfitter’s log book from the 50’s and 60’s. He recorded the game animals killed, their antler “points”, area killed, and cartridge used. Sometimes he recorded the rifle model. Its amazing how many elk were killed with a 300 Savage.

Edit to add: I went back and found the post about the log book:

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/12434502/timbermaster

I'd like to see the most current edition of B&C records. A Coast Guard guy named David Simmerman killed a brown bear I had been hunting. I think it fell just outside the top 10. That would have been around 1998.

Didn’t John Plute kill the longtime world record bull with a Krag? Could have been a 30/30 but I think it was a 30/40.

I was thinking a lot were killed with a 30-30 too

Yep he killed it with a Krag and the current world record typical killed by Alonzo Winters fell to a 300 Savage. It doesn't take a cannon or the newest wiz bang caliber to take game. It takes putting an adequate bullet in the right place. This has always been the case. Many hunters today fall for hype and don't really learn how to hunt or shoot in field conditions. What a rifle can do on the bench at 500 yards is not relevant when an elk is hauling ass through heavy timber and you have time for one shot. The man that knows his rifle can make that shot but the guy that grew up watching YouTube videos on hunting probably can't.

I think something we forget is years ago there were very few calibers to choose from.Until the 1960's the main calibers were .30-30 class .300 Sav/.30-40 class and the 06/.270 class. The only magnum in an average rifle was the .300 H&H. When I started elk hunting in the 70's, the .300 Sav. was common then probably the 06 and .270. The .25-06 wasn't very old so some were trying that. There simply wasn't much selection.
Also in this area elk hunting was just getting off the ground so to speak. The few elk that were here existed in the mountains. Shots were not very long unless you found one in a park or clear cut. So the old deer hunters just used their deer rifles for elk. Shots were close, and at large target. Also rifles in the west were more difficult to come by than in more populated areas.
Gradually, elk spread over all of Wyoming today, every part of the state is an elk area of some kind. Now much of the shooting is in open prairie country or large open canyons.
And rifles of all kinds are fairly cheap and ammo was usually easily obtained. I think these changes are forgotten by most folks, or they never saw things in the old days.

I think people also were more prone to just have a rifle and make do instead of the common current trend towards having a rifle for every species and condition. Not that there’s anything wrong with that mind you.

My Grandad started big game hunting when he got out of the army in the Korean War era. There were no deer here but he was planning to head west to hunt. So he bought a centerfire rifle in the only cartridge he had any experience with, the 30/06. Now 70 years later it remains the only centerfire rifle he’s ever owned and he accounted for a few tons of deer and elk with it down through the years. He also owns one rimfire, a Remington 550 he bought at the commissary to replace his 22 that was stolen while he was away in the service. And an Ithaca 37 purchased for the same reason. He’s never seen the need for anything else and it hasn’t seemed to hinder his success.

The 15th Edition just came out, and I splurged the $200 cost of the hardcover set because not only did I get my name in it several times, but they put pictures of me with two of my caribou in it. An honor that I never even dreamed of getting.

I don't have the books with me, but I'll check when I get home.

Although I doubt it will ever happen, I'd like to see the name of the hunter removed from all record books. It's supposed to be about the animal.

Why I'd like to see the name of the hunter, the guide (if guided), the location (not exact) and the caliber used.

Congrats, that's really cool. I appreciate the offer to check on that brown bear.

some were shot with an arrow not a rifle cartridge , so then what would you suggest broadhead used ?

Did you ever hear of pope and young.

B&C is a hunting record if you just want record antlers should'nt that be a National Geographic thing

Wrong. When B&C was founded, it was to document the largest specimens of game because they were really concerned that most of the game animals would be completely destroyed. So, the intention was to document when and where they were found as a matter of historical record. It did not become a "hunting record" until much later. And B&C still accepts and documents animals that were found in the field and they are listed as picked up rather than taken.

There are 14 pages of the Alaskan Brown Bear records in the latest (15th Edition) B&C Records of North American Big Game.

I could not find David Simmerman's name listed.

Even if he had his bear officially scored, maybe he did not enter it.

In my own case, when I shot my Musk Ox and one of my Central Canadian Barren Ground Caribou, I had them officially scored, but I didn't send them into B&C headquarters for several years. Then after I shot my Quebec-Labrador Caribou and had him scored, the B&C official measurer, who I have known for over 30 years, asked me why I hadn't sent in the score sheets of my other animals, and he was a little upset that I hadn't sent them in. So I then sent all 3 of those score sheets in, and now I'm very honored to have been included in both the 30th and 31st B&C Big Game Award books and also this new 15th Edition Record Book.