Olympic Bull Down

[hntrspud]

Good job MLB! Looks like its your year!

[pd]

I think Ray Charles could tell you that bull is legal.  Good Job hope the pack out wasn't to bad

Actually, I think Ray Charles could indeed tell this bull was legal.  Count the points (I see 3 on each side), estimate if they are 1" or longer (they all seem so to me).  Where is the controversy?  (Or, maybe I am the blind man?)

[bhawley76]

isn't that what I said?

[lamrith]

I think Ray Charles could tell you that bull is legal.  Good Job hope the pack out wasn't to bad

Actually, I think Ray Charles could indeed tell this bull was legal.  Count the points (I see 3 on each side), estimate if they are 1" or longer (they all seem so to me).  Where is the controversy?  (Or, maybe I am the blind man?)

The question some others are having has to do with the "two points above the ear" requirement.

[Curly]

I think Ray Charles could tell you that bull is legal.  Good Job hope the pack out wasn't to bad

Actually, I think Ray Charles could indeed tell this bull was legal.  Count the points (I see 3 on each side), estimate if they are 1" or longer (they all seem so to me).  Where is the controversy?  (Or, maybe I am the blind man?)

I better go get my eyes checked then.  It is hard to see the fork above the ears unless the pic is blown up.  Even then it is hard.

3 point rule:   3 Point Minimum: A 3 Pt. Min. elk means that a legal elk in these GMUs must have at least 3 antler points on one side, with at least 2 antler points above the ear. Eye guards are antler points when they are at least one inch long.

Still a good bull though.  I hope there really are forks and they are just hard to see at the angle of the pic  

[Mike450r]

The 2 points above the ear mean that they originate above the ear or a branch above the ear.  Eye guards count as points but only in the overall count, if an eye gaurd extends above the ear it still does nothing about the point that has to originate above the ear.

As BTKR stated,  without the branch above the ear on the right side this would not be a legal bull.

[bobcat]

I'm not seeing the second point above the ear. Maybe there's a point there, but I don't believe anyone is actually seeing a point there, with 100% certainty. It's just not possible in that picture. I see a slight bump, which may or may not be the origin of a point. It takes a good imagination to see a point there, either that or someone with a lot better eyesight than what I have.

[Mhamil]

I would have definitely shot that bull, I also agree that this thread is the very reason that their are not more animals posted. Why can't everyone just be happy that the kid got his first bull witth archery equipment and leave it that? How many of you remember your first elk and how you felt to tell the story, and then to have it torn down on an open forum.
You nay sayers should be ashamed

[pd]

isn't that what I said?

Yes.

[billythekidrock]

I would have definitely shot that bull, I also agree that this thread is the very reason that their are not more animals posted. Why can't everyone just be happy that the kid got his first bull witth archery equipment and leave it that? How many of you remember your first elk and how you felt to tell the story, and then to have it torn down on an open forum.
You nay sayers should be ashamed

So why would you "definitely" shoot this bull?
A. Because it is a spike with double eyeguards
B. Because you can see the fork above the ears on the right side

[Curly]

I think it is a good discussion to have (whether or not the bull can legally be considered a 3 point). Obviously there is confusion the way the regs are worded and confusion with the angle of the pic.

[Russ McDonald]

It comes down the this MLBowhunting is not some new guy here.  I think he knows what he is doing as you can probably see from his avatar.  If it wasn't legal I bet he wouldn't have posted it. 

Look at my last post with his picture.  I circled where the top of the left side looking at the picture there is a branch of the top.  Looking at those horns I would imagine your going to find the same branch on the other side.  It is the angle of the picture.  Lets just congratulate the man for a nice animal and move on.

[Mike450r]

I would have definitely shot that bull, I also agree that this thread is the very reason that their are not more animals posted. Why can't everyone just be happy that the kid got his first bull witth archery equipment and leave it that? How many of you remember your first elk and how you felt to tell the story, and then to have it torn down on an open forum.
You nay sayers should be ashamed

I am not trying to put down the bull or the hunter.  I am only explaining how the 3 point rule works.  I am seeing a legal 4x3 bull.   I am trying to educate the others that think it would be legal with spikes and double eye guards.   They are incorrect.

[Band]

I would have definitely shot that bull, I also agree that this thread is the very reason that their are not more animals posted. Why can't everyone just be happy that the kid got his first bull witth archery equipment and leave it that? How many of you remember your first elk and how you felt to tell the story, and then to have it torn down on an open forum.
You nay sayers should be ashamed

I hope the successful hunter understands that nobody is knocking that bull and that we are all happy for his success.  Our questions about the legality of the bull as a 3-point is nothing more than information gathering to be sure we are following the regulations and frustration with WDFW that those regulations are not explicit enough for everyone to understand.

[jackelope]

I'd almost guarantee there is a fork on the right side and the angle of the photo makes it hard to see. This thread is unfortunately a perfect example of why people don't post pictures on this forum anymore. I sure hope that MLBowhunting continues to do so, but I won't blame him if he doesn't.