Thanks for the kind words fellows.
Russ, I hear you and understand. Historically speaking, ornate rifles were not that common and not likely used every day. That's why they survived to be collected today. The plain working rifles were used until they were completely worn out. A man who made a living with his rifle would not have paid the cost of all that fancy art. A plain Lancaster rifle can be built in about 40 hours of shop work. My rifle has 150 + hours of work into it. That is considerably more expensive provided you can find someone with that level of artistic talent. Anyone who might have owned such a rifle would likely be a wealthy man who hunted for sport more than food. And he may have never hunted with it but, as you suggest, displayed it on the wall.
Believe me, I have plain simple, ugly guns for hunting and rendezvous use. This new one is my only fancy smoke pole. I would never drag a rifle like this through the fields to hunt big game. In that situation, I am much more concerned with making meat than being careful not to ding up a rifle.
From the get go I intended to use this rifle for match shooting and the occasional small game hunt. Hench the small caliber and all the art work. I have simply reached a time in life where I'm not going into the briar patches after a squirrel or a bunny. And I have reached a time in life where I can appreciate having one rifle that is so pretty it must be handled carefully.
This rifle will be used and shot. Alot. But it will also be handled with kid gloves and cared for like a baby.
It isn't the gun I will carry when portraying a mountain man either. That will be my flintlock smoothbore or one of my plains rifles.
I don't want to sound like I am justifying anything. Just attempting to put it into proper context. Rifles like this were never common, and no long hunter or mountain man would have owned one. If he did it would have been during his twilight years.
This rifle will not be a safe queen I plan to shoot it, often!
