Above the ears ??

[robodad]

Does this mean when the ears are in their natural position or do you streach them up to the antler to measure or hold them straight up in the air or put both the ear tips together and that is where you measure from ?? could you show an example if possable !!

I have heard all these arguements and just want to be clear !! 

[Firing Pin]

Good question...  I have always used "in their natural position"

[Huntbear]

if you look in the regs, it shows pictures of what is legal and the ears are in the natural position.

[robodad]

Well after further review it appears they have revised the rule to be 4" above where the antler attaches to the skull so no more ear measurements !! 

[huntnphool]

LOL, I actually discussed this with the game cops, instructors and class while sitting in my daughters hunters education class. The game cops said most would not issue a citation if it were close and said a decent lawyer could get you off of the charge because the regs dont say "in the upright position" or "in the strait out position" or "in the down position"

[300rum]

We may have a case of someone's head not being in the right position.   

[BENCHLEG]

CAN YOU SAY GREY AREA? HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU HAVE? J

[BlackTail]

A friend of mine that I elk hunt with is a biologist for state.  We were talking about the "above the ear rule" ourselves.  He said he would call a buddy of his that worked for the game department in Olympia and even he couldn't couldn't tell us what that meant.  Glad they finally changed that.

[C-Money]

What dose it mean about if it is with in an inch of the definition regaurding length measurement is an infraction? I dont know? Confusing how it is written.

[Bob33]

"What dose it mean about if it is with in an inch of the definition regaurding length measurement is an infraction?"

Let's clarify first: the "above the ear" definition is still valid in 3 pt minimum areas: "A 3 Pt. Min. elk means that a legal elk in these GMUs must have at least 3 antler points on one side, at least 2 antler points above the ear."

There are now "spike" and "true spike" areas.  In "true spike" areas, the rule is "Bull elk taken in these units must have both antlers with no branching originating more than four inches above where the antlers attach to the skull.  Under the true spike restriction, the taking of an elk that has two points on one side or has antler points within one inch of the definitions regarding length of point, or point of origination is an infraction."

In order to understand "branching", you must read the definition:

"Branch:
A branch is defined as any projection off the main antler beam that is at least one inch long, measured on the longest side, and longer than it is wide."

There are two terms with length measurements (1) “branch” (must be at least one inch), and (2) “origination” as in "originating more than four inches above where the antlers attach to the skull".

My interpretation of the phrase “within one inch of the definitions regarding length of
point, or point of origination” is therefore this: if the branch is between 0 and 2 inches, it is within one inch.  If the point of origination is 3 to 5 inches, it is within one inch.

Very confusing.  To simplify it down to terms that are easily understood: if you’re in a 3 pt minimum area, make damn sure there at least three long points well above the ears on at least one side.  In a true spike area, if you see anything on the spike at all, don’t shoot.

[robodad]

"What dose it mean about if it is with in an inch of the definition regaurding length measurement is an infraction?"

Let's clarify first: the "above the ear" definition is still valid in 3 pt minimum areas: "A 3 Pt. Min. elk means that a legal elk in these GMUs must have at least 3 antler points on one side, at least 2 antler points above the ear."

There are now "spike" and "true spike" areas.  In "true spike" areas, the rule is "Bull elk taken in these units must have both antlers with no branching originating more than four inches above where the antlers attach to the skull.  Under the true spike restriction, the taking of an elk that has two points on one side or has antler points within one inch of the definitions regarding length of point, or point of origination is an infraction."

In order to understand "branching", you must read the definition:

"Branch:
A branch is defined as any projection off the main antler beam that is at least one inch long, measured on the longest side, and longer than it is wide."

There are two terms with length measurements (1) “branch” (must be at least one inch), and (2) “origination” as in "originating more than four inches above where the antlers attach to the skull".

My interpretation of the phrase “within one inch of the definitions regarding length of
point, or point of origination” is therefore this: if the branch is between 0 and 2 inches, it is within one inch.  If the point of origination is 3 to 5 inches, it is within one inch.

Very confusing.  To simplify it down to terms that are easily understood: if you’re in a 3 pt minimum area, make damn sure there at least three long points well above the ears on at least one side.  In a true spike area, if you see anything on the spike at all, don’t shoot.

Apparently you missed the question entirely but thats ok it happens !!! 

[Bob33]

What is the question that was missed?

[robodad]

What is the question that was missed?

Exactly how do you measure "above the ear" does that mean when you stretch them along the antler beam, or lay them flat, or when the elk is on alert or in a relaxed position, or just a guess of where they would be or what.

The "Above the ear" rule is very confusing and now with the new "True Spike" rule it is even more critical that this rule be clarified.

Spikes should be counted when there are no branches on either side from the base where it attaches to the skull to the point where it ends.

any other restrictions should be counted the same where if it branches after it leaves the skull its a point and so a 3pt could be a spike with double eyeguards or a rag horn with no eyeguards, if they are worried that too many young bulls will be killed with eyeguards then make it a 4pt minimum.

I just don't understand why we have to figure out where the ears are in relation to the branches to determine if it is legal.

[Bob33]

Another question was asked, which was "What dose it mean about if it is with in an inch of the definition regaurding length measurement is an infraction? I dont know? Confusing how it is written."

This is the question I answered.  The question how ears are measured would be up the field officer, and I think that's why the "within an inch" phrase was added.  If it's even close to four inches, no matter how it's measured, don't shoot.  I assume they would refer to ears in a natural position, not stretched, unlesss you can stretch them before you shoot :>)

[robodad]

Another question was asked, which was "What dose it mean about if it is with in an inch of the definition regaurding length measurement is an infraction? I dont know? Confusing how it is written."

This is the question I answered.  The question how ears are measured would be up the field officer, and I think that's why the "within an inch" phrase was added.  If it's even close to four inches, no matter how it's measured, don't shoot.  I assume they would refer to ears in a natural position, not stretched, unlesss you can stretch them before you shoot :>)

Sorry my misunderstanding !!  Still a dumb rule !!