Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Habitat and Exhibit' started by fish stuffer, Sep 26, 2018.
I read there will be a habitat comp. at World show. What do ya'll think about it?
Some people put alot of time and effort into there habitat should be an award or recognition for it.
An outstanding habitat will predispose a judge to overlook minor flaws in some criteria if the overall appearance of the total artwork is artfully done and and accurate to habitat accessories intelligently arranged. That is, I wouldn't put any animal on just a naked chunk of artificial rock or just a piece of driftwood unless it was the type indigenous to the animals natural habitat which helps provide a believable context for the action, active or passive, that the specimen is exhibiting. Correct rocks, plants and driftwood aid truth and give a context for the activity portrayed.
I emailed Breakthrough and asked if there would be a habitat category, but haven't received and answer.
I read someplace it was official. Personally I don't agree with it. I see too many that have alot of work into the habitat when the mount has many flaws. I saw a buck at a show once that had an entire "swamp scene" complete with shed deer antler . It looked like he used 10 gallons of envirotex, base about 6 feet square. It had cypress knees, bones, water mud, trees, but the buck got a red ribbon. I would hate to think a judge saw flaws on a mt. but overlooked it because the habitat was excellent.
I meant to get back to you sooner but…
Personally, it’s obvious to me that competitors believe a base is important to compliment a mount otherwise they wouldn’t go to a lot of time and expense to make elaborate ones. The base you describe sounds amateurish and was likely done by a newbee to competitions who hadn’t any design skills but was nevertheless eager to make an impression. If the mount got only a second, the judge wasn't impressed with the base either.
Fancy habitat bases are not a recent development spawned by competitions. They have been part of the art of taxidermy practically since the beginning of the art, both in museums and commercially.
Maybe it’s just my background, but I believe habitat construction is a legitimate skill of taxidermists. If for no other reason that bases enhance the context for the mount and, very importantly, taxidermists charge handsomely for the extra work and materials. No reason not to have a category to assess and judge those kind of skills. Secondly, to the best of my knowledge scorecards don’t have a criteria to judge the base along with the mount. It makes sense that they score only the mount.
If there’s a new category for habitats only, I would think that an entry wouldn’t need a specimen on it at all, unless of course a mount affected the score some way which to me is not logical. We will have to wait to see what the rules turn out to be for a habitat category before we will know for sure.
I feel that as I'm sure everyone feels, the base and mount should compliment each other and not over power one or the other.
I have seen the most beautiful habitat that was perfect for a certain mount and the most horrid thing placed in there more often than it should be, however, it's not that often that I see a stellar mount places in horrid habitat.
Follow this link. It tells you ALL of the criteria for the new habitat category / awards.