Packing out quarters. What order?

[bobcat]

You should try it. I don't like to pack out anymore than I have to. Especially if it's uphill and over a 1/4 mile.

[provider]

Hmmm?  I guess I had a different interpretation of how the “evidence of animal’s sex” rule is written.

What it says under Tagging and Transportation is:  3. (b) It is illegal to possess or transport big game animals unless evidence of the animal's sex is left naturally attached to the carcass until the carcass is processed or stored for consumption.  Evidence of sex means:  Male- head with antlers or horns attached (naturally to the carcass) or penis or testes naturally attached to at least one quarter of the carcass or to the largest portion of meat.
 
My interpretation is evidence has to be naturally attached to the carcass.  I routinely have to pack my animal out long distance.  So, the head never comes out on my back and is left behind after antlers and cape are removed.  This, in my interpretation, requires me to leave the testes or penis naturally attached to a hind quarter or, if boned out, to the largest portion of meat.   

[bobcat]

provider,  I think everybody is in agreement on what you just said. 

[billythekidrock]

provider,  I think everybody is in agreement on what you just said. 

[boneaddict]

All I know is that my hound liked moose testicles when I got home with them properly attached to the hind quarter.  SUPER scooby snacks

[provider]

bobcat,  maybe I misunderstood you?  I thought you said that if you have "the head with the antlers attached, you are ok.  That's all you need."  I assumed you meant the cut-off head, but the antlers still attached to the skull?  And that wouldn't be ok, unless the nuts were still attached.

Maybe I misunderstood "rackattack" too?  He said, "head and antlers has never been a problem", even after removing the twig and berries.  I thought both of you were suggesting if you remove the nuts, and cut-off the head but leave the antlers attached... it is ok?  I apologize if I misunderstood.     

[Curly]

Thanks for clarifying, Provider.  I think there was some misunderstanding going on there, but I'm not sure you were the on misunderstanding.............. .

What you were warning people about is if you cut the head off, you better have a nut sack left on the animal.

But if you bring the animal out whole or cut in half, you can get away with just having the head and get rid of the twig and berries.

[bobcat]

bobcat,  maybe I misunderstood you?  I thought you said that if you have "the head with the antlers attached, you are ok.  That's all you need."  I assumed you meant the cut-off head, but the antlers still attached to the skull?  And that wouldn't be ok, unless the nuts were still attached.

Nope, I guess you understood me correctly. We have a different interpretation of the law. The way the law is written, I take it to mean you can either have the head with antlers attached, OR if you don't have the head then you need "penis or testes naturally attached to at least one quarter of the carcass or to the largest portion of meat."

[Dick Cress]

Depends on whether my four partners are close by or not. We use the gutless boning out method. If I'm alone, I'll bone out then my first and second loads are the hind quarters. Then whatever it takes for the fore quarters and misclleanous meat, hide with sex identifier attached last.

[boneaddict]

Basically I think the gist of the law is to keep some *censored* from running around with a set of spike antlers, shooting cows and claiming they belong to the antlers back at the truck.  Though a pain in the ass, it seem pretty reasonable to me.

[bobcat]

Basically I think the gist of the law is to keep some *censored* from running around with a set of spike antlers, shooting cows and claiming they belong to the antlers back at the truck.  Though a pain in the ass, it seem pretty reasonable to me.

But the law doesn't prevent that, if my interpretation of the law is correct.

[Curly]

Bob, maybe your interpretation is incorrect. 

Here is what Provider quoted: "Evidence of sex means:  Male- head with antlers or horns attached  or penis or testes naturally attached (naturally to the carcass) to at least one quarter of the carcass or to the largest portion of meat."

I bolded what I think the key to the wording is.  Naturally to the carcass.........does that mean that the head can't be removed?

[boneaddict]

But the law doesn't prevent that, if my interpretation of the law is correct.

That surprises you?
Wheres the lawyer?
Now I'm confused and will have to go back and read all of your posts....
I get the testicle thing if there is NO head.
If there is a whole head, brains, sunken eyeballs and such with antlers attached, NO testicles neccessary.
If there is a set of antlers, sawed off, because I don't want to carry the damn head out, or I want to travel back home to NM and I don't want to be in trouble with CWD etc,
Do I need the testicles on or not???

[billythekidrock]

Bob, maybe your interpretation is incorrect. 

Here is what Provider quoted: "Evidence of sex means:  Male- head with antlers or horns attached  or penis or testes naturally attached (naturally to the carcass) to at least one quarter of the carcass or to the largest portion of meat."

I bolded what I think the key to the wording is.  Naturally to the carcass.........does that mean that the head can't be removed?

That is what I understood it to be, either the nuts attached to a hind quarter or the rack/head attached to a front quarter or half.

[bobcat]

I am only saying it doesn't prevent that from happening because somebody could have a spike elk head (with antlers attached) and that could be used to go along with a cow elk to make it look legal. Your interpretation of the law is the same as mine. (I think)  I interpret the law to mean if you have the head, you don't need testicles. It's one, or the other, not both.