Your thought on counting points on deer, All together or one side,eye guards etc

[robodad]

Those of you that don't count eyeguards should never shoot a deer with two points and eyeguards, even if it is the last day, some of you will say "no problem" others of you will say SOAB I should have counted those eyeguards !! 

Either way you look at it they still count as points and you are fooling yourself and confusing me if you don't count them.

I hope none of you shoot a buck with 2pts and eyeguards cause that will leave that many more for me to shoot !!!   

[bobcat]

I've never considered an eyeguard a point. When somebody tells me they got a 4 point, I am expecting a true 4 point buck, with two forked antlers. It can have eyeguards or not, but if so then it's a 4 point with eyeguards. If they call it just a 4 point, then I assume it had no eyeguards. But that's just me. Those of you who count everything, go ahead and keep counting eyeguards and try to make your bucks sound better than they are.    It's not a big deal. I guess we need to see pictures of all bucks to verify what it really is, since there seems to be no standard way of doing it.

[Curly]

Dman, the guy in your scenario is an idiot.  He should have read the regs.  Plus he is a poacher and he should not have shot the buck unless he was sure that it had 3 points (even though it really did technically, according to the law).

Most people are aware that there are at least three different ways that people count points on deer.  If someone doesn't find out the legal definition of a 3-point or 2-point or whatever minimum restriction is in use, he is an idiot. 

[Dman]

 I think "unconscionable" sums that up much quicker.
"Most people are aware that there are at least three different ways that people count points on deer."

 More than one legal way to count a 3 point in the State of Washington? I'm all ears??
 You painted a perfect example of the problem. Some out of State hunter's actually do ask other hunter's in the State they are hunting questions about the regulations in that State. Frankly, given how accross the board we are on this thread with our own "definitions" of how to count points on a deer, if I was an out of State hunter I would never bother asking a local what they knew about the subject. It's all about consistency and frankly we're damned inconsistent when it comes to this topic, that's why we need to stick with the State's legal definition. That said every hunter has a responsibility to read and understand the regs, that goes without saying. I know for myself, if I read and fully understood the regs going into a new State and I happened upon a local who gave me some conflicting information, the first thing I would have to do would be go back and re-check the definition in the regs to make sure I was correct and I'd be a little pissed I must say. That's BS, if your going to give out information, it should be accurate by the State's legal definition, not one you invented, has absolutely nothing to do with how big someone want's to make their buck sound, pictures don't lie. my personal feeling is that there is a group of hunter's who hunt outside the State, where definitions differ in States like Wyoming, or Montana and they bring that definition back to Wa. and employ it here as well. That's not directed at anyone here, but that seems to me to be where the difference of opinion is created.
 

[Curly]

More than one legal way to count a 3 point in the State of Washington? I'm all ears??

I didn't say "legal" way.  There is only one legal definition of a "point". 

Just because the law says a 3-point is defined one way doesn't mean that everyone should change the way they describe how many points a deer has to meet the definition described in the law.  One should be able to differentiate between the law and what people mean when they say 3-point or 2-point or whatever.

[Red Dawg]

I sooooooo agree curly. The way we say it and the regulations are different and that is OK. If someone is not smart enough to differentiate that then I would think they are not even smart enough to operate a gun, if youknow what i mean. They is more than one good way to do anything and as we have found out it applies directly to this topic. D-Man you do make a good point but unfortunately none of us are 100% right or wrong. That is just the way it is.

[Curly]

Dman, you bring up Wyoming and their definition..........they have the same definition of a "point".

WYOMING GAME AND FISH COMMISSION
 
CHAPTER 2

GENERAL HUNTING REGULATION
 
Section 2.  Definitions.  For the purpose of this regulation, definitions shall be as set forth in Title 23, Wyoming Statutes, and the Commission also adopts the following definitions:

(u)  “Point” means any protrusion from an antler one (1) inch or more in length.

And I bet Montana has the same definition.

[robodad]

OK what the @#$% is a fork-n-horn ?? 

[Red Dawg]

2 point or a 4 pointer what ever you want to call it. not legal on the east side.

[Dman]

More than one legal way to count a 3 point in the State of Washington? I'm all ears??

I didn't say "legal" way.  There is only one legal definition of a "point". 

Just because the law says a 3-point is defined one way doesn't mean that everyone should change the way they describe how many points a deer has to meet the definition described in the law.  One should be able to differentiate between the law and what people mean when they say 3-point or 2-point or whatever.

   
 I must have missed something since hunting first began in Wa.. The State's definition has always been the same and has never changed. 

 The Wyoming definition is not actually the same, here's Washington's:
 "All antler points must be at least one inch
long measured on the longest side. Eye guards are
antler points when they are at least one inch long."

 Does not read the same at all, it bears no mention of specifically an eyeguard as a point. One could also assume, an eyeguard grows from the base of the antler, not the main beam itself and might not be counted. Wyoming states "any portrusion from the antler" -not the same as base of the antler. Actually when I was speaking of hunter's in those other two States I was referring to guys like Eastman, who I do no believe counts eyeguards as points. I do like Eastman's as a whole.

 We can go on and on about how stupid hunter's are who do this and that, the bottom line is changes occur to hunt regs all the time, even in season and consistency in information is the only way to stay on top of it. I won't agree with you, but hey, let's agree to disagree. I'm stupid enough to earn three degrees and draft Policies (with definitions) in my career, but what do I know 
 

[bobcat]

OK what the @#$% is a fork-n-horn ?? 

It's a strange way of referring to a 2 point. I've heard of guys in Oregon who use that term, but nowhere else. It sounds retarded to me. Did somebody here use that term? If so, I missed it.

[Hunting Cowboy]

I agree that we will probably all end up agreeing to disagree on this one, but lets remember that this started out with asking for "your thoughts" on the subject. So here's mine. I do understand what the legal definition is of a legal point and that all points are counted and count towards what is considered a legal buck.

That being said, My dad (who has always been a dedicated hunter and sportsman) but is and always has been a meat hunter happy to take the first legal buck he finds. One year he killed a fat 2x3. This buck had a 2x3 main fame but had several additional points around its bases. All were 1 to 2 inches in length making this bucks total point count a 5x8. There is no way my dad would tell his buddies and friends that he killed a 5x8. He wouldn't have even considered it and neither would I. It's a 2x3

It looks like a 2x3 with a bunch odd eye guards. Do they each count as legal points......you bet they do! Everyone of my dads hunting friends and aquaintance considers this buck a 2x3. No one in our part of the world would consider this a 13 point buck, yet it has 13 countable points. Maybe its a cultural thing, generational thing or a regional thing I don't know, but its what I and a lot of hunters I know grew up thinking. So we're each entitled to our thoughts on this and I guess it depends on how you want to look at it.

[Skyvalhunter]

Well Lets see some pictures of that 2 X 3 then and we can judge for ya!!

[Hunting Cowboy]

Skyvalhunter......I'll see what I can do! 

[jackelope]

OK what the @#$% is a fork-n-horn ?? 

It's a strange way of referring to a 2 point. I've heard of guys in Oregon who use that term, but nowhere else. It sounds retarded to me. Did somebody here use that term? If so, I missed it.

i always thought it was a typo for what is really supposed to read as a forked-horn.