So you want to get that big bass mounted. What’ll it be—a traditional skin mount, a fiberglass replica mount, a habitat mount, or perhaps something more artistic? There are more choices available today than ever before, as I discovered when I attended the 33rd annual convention, competition and trade show of the National Taxidermists Association (NTA), held July 7-10, 2004, in Huntsville, Alabama.

Dan Rinehart of Edgerton, Wisconsin (866/296-2782, LearnTaxidermy.com), is a second-generation taxidermist, runs a taxidermy school, and supplies products to the trade. “Taxidermy is an attempt to preserve the beauty of nature, and serious anglers appreciate a good fish mount,” he says.

Taxidermy is about equally split between skin mounts and fiberglass reproduction mounts, according to Rinehart. “Saltwater fish mounts have gone fiberglass in a big way, but freshwater taxidermy has been slower to switch. With bass and walleye, for example, the skin mount business is still strong because many anglers think skin mounts look better.” Replica mounts are still more expensive than a skin mount, up to 33 percent more. But pricing is expected to level off as the trend toward replicas strengthens.

What are today’s anglers looking for in a fish mount? “More realism in the painting, eyes, and form, and they don’t mind paying more to get that,” Rinehart says. Some anglers also are demanding a more artistic display of their catch, something more aesthetically pleasing than a fish on a board. Habitat mounts, where the fish is shown in an accurate portrayal of an aquatic environment, have become popular. I believe most avid anglers will eventually go to this level in their mounts.”

Besides doing taxidermy work, Rinehart runs a company that manufactures foam mannequins (forms) and other components for skin mounts. His latest development is a selection of amazingly realistic eyes for freshwater fish. “I scuba dive, and I always noticed that existing artificial eyes didn’t capture the realistic coloration of a live fish. I spent three years developing a series of more accurate artificial eyes I call Aqua Eyes.

“They’re the first fish eyes to utilize photographic re-imaging technology, which fuses a high-definition 3-D photograph of an actual eye from a living fish into a clear lens. This achieves the exact pattern and coloration of a live fish eye as seen above water. It really makes a fish mount come alive.”

Rinehart operates a taxidermy school at his Edgerton headquarters. “There’s currently more demand for taxidermy work than there are taxidermists,” he says. “It’s an excellent career opportunity—most quality taxidermists have a backlog of at least a year. Taxidermy is one of the last true cottage industries—you can set up shop in your garage or basement and do it part-time or full-time. A skilled taxidermist will develop a clientele that keeps coming back for years, providing many referrals.” Rinehart’s six-week training sessions are held four times a year at a cost of $3,100.

Mike Kirkhart of New Wave Fish Reproductions in Stuart, Florida (772/283-7270), explained the business of fiberglass reproduction. “We do taxidermy and also supply fiberglass fish forms to the trade. You need molds for a wide range of lengths and girths for each species. We have molds for largemouth bass up to 26 inches long by 21 inches in girth, taken off real fish.

“We currently have 1,600 fish molds in stock, and share our molds within the trade. If a client calls and I don’t have the exact mold for his fish, I probably know somebody who does. Or, I can sculpt any released fish using measurements or a photo. The process is like building a boat, with fiberglass and resin. Reproduction mounts are hollow and lightweight. There’s no shrinkage over time as inevitably occurs with skin mounts. They take paint beautifully and last indefinitely. Skin mounts typically show signs of deterioration after 10 to 20 years.”

Saltwater taxidermists have been doing fiberglass reproductions since the 1950s, but the public was largely unaware that their mount was fiberglass, Kirkhart notes. “Fiberglass reproductions of freshwater fish have been available for approximately 20 years, but it’s only recently that many anglers have begun requesting them. They recognize that they can catch a big fish, release it, and still get an accurate mount of their catch.”

Matt Thompson, a taxidermist and supplier of fiberglass components from Lovejoy, Georgia (800/477-6815), says, “I still do plenty of skin mounts, but you certainly lose detail due to shrinkage. In the head of a largemouth bass, for example, all those fleshy areas on a live fish are lost in a skin mount. It will shrink to the bone and the bass will look gaunt. A fiberglass replica eliminates this—these look as full and lively as the fish was when you caught it. Accurate scale painting is needed to make a fiberglass repro mount come alive,” Thompson adds.

Artistic Impression

Competition is a major part of the NTA show, and there were some truly impressive pieces on display. Kenneth Bauman, Anadarko, Oklahoma (405/247-5711), won a blue ribbon for his largemouth bass. “It’s a skin mount using a body that I cast off the actual fish so the anatomy is identical to the fish—you can’t get away with using a stock fiberglass replica body in this competition,” he explains. “Once the skin was treated, I used an airbrush to recreate the living pattern and colors, then applied a two-part polyurethane auto gloss for a realistic wet look.”

Bauman’s prize winner, a bass leaping from the water on a pedestal, is not your typical piece of taxidermy. “I’ve competed for over 10 years, and the trend in competition has gone from a habitat recreation with grass and driftwood to a more artistic representation of the fish. These displays are attractive at an aesthetic level. Like a piece of sculpture, it has a pleasing flow meant to capture something in your heart.”

In taxidermy competition, fish size isn’t important. One of the most striking pieces was the eatin’-sized walleye by John Lager of Littleton, Colorado (303/979-2647). Lager, a past North American champion, is renowned for his walleye mounts and won first place in the NTA’s division of excellence. “Most anglers want to mount a big fish, but you can create a pleasing display that captures your appreciation of the species with a small fish,” he notes.

“If you love walleyes, you could display a piece like this in your den and everyone would find it aesthetically pleasing.” The design and composition is simple, flowing. It incorporates a piece of cherrywood and a slab of granite on a Formica base. Lager spent about 200 hours on it, painting every scale three or four colors to capture the subtleties of a live walleye. Lager sees a trend toward 3-D mounts (fish finished all around, not just on one side) in his business.

Another award-winning piece that caught my eye was a leaping salmon crafted by Mike Ross of Elizabeth, Colorado (303/841-2310). It captured first place in the division of excellence, a category composed solely of past award-winners. Another Ross creation, a spectacular pair of brown trout in full spawning colors fighting over a crawfish, was so realistic you could almost feel the rush of current. “High-level taxidermy competition is leaning toward artistic impression,” he explains. “On the commercial level, as well, my clientele favors more aesthetically pleasing displays than in the past.”

Jeff Mourning, Littleton, Colorado, was a judge in the fish division. What does he look for in an award-winning piece of taxidermy? “The first consideration is whether it’s aesthetically pleasing,” he reports. “Then it’s craftsmanship—how it was built, the quality of epoxy work, body casting and assembly. Then I consider anatomy—muscle structure, shape, and movement of the fins.

“Then we consider the painting, 70 percent of which is usually airbrushing. We don’t deduct for color because fish vary; rather, we pay attention to how the paint is applied. Is the pattern done correctly? Mike Ross’ brown trout, for example, is extraordinarily clean, with master-quality painting. The detailing is superb.”

Art appreciation has yet to filter down to the weekend angler looking to have a lunker mounted, Mourning admits. “Joe Lunchbucket doesn’t care much about the aesthetics of the piece and definitely won’t pay for it. Mike Ross and I once collaborated on a chum salmon that was judged best in the world. We put over a thousand hours in it. The public doesn’t yet view us as wildlife artists, but hopefully this will change.”

* Don Wirth, Nashville, Tennessee, is a veteran outdoor writer and photographer who has contributed to In-Fisherman publications for over two decades.