Post by: Intruder on September 25, 2007, 09:20:39 AM
Post by: bobcat on September 25, 2007, 09:25:46 AM
Post by: T-ROY on September 25, 2007, 09:43:24 AM
Post by: jackelope on September 25, 2007, 09:52:42 AM
doesn't look like you got "my bull"
thats an awesome looking bull. congrats.
Post by: saylean on September 25, 2007, 10:05:49 AM
Post by: Ridgerunner on September 25, 2007, 10:26:32 AM
Post by: jackelope on September 25, 2007, 10:28:20 AM
Post by: boneaddict on September 25, 2007, 10:38:14 AM
Post by: Intruder on September 25, 2007, 11:11:03 AM
43.5 width
21 pts
Left: 7 3/8 cir, 12 7/8 palm width, 37 1/2 palm length
Right: 6 7/8 cir, 11 1/2 palm width, 29 1/2 palm length
Palm length measurement is what we're not sure about. We followed the B/C instructions right from the book but not sure we understood em completely?
Post by: boneaddict on September 25, 2007, 11:29:22 AM
Post by: elkaholic on September 25, 2007, 11:52:01 AM
met that gentlemen up on the mountain a few weeks back. He definetly passed on alot of Bulls up there. I think he saw more elk then we did too. :'(
Chris, nice BULL. You better be putting that guy on the wall.
Post by: Choclab on September 25, 2007, 12:32:59 PM
Post by: GoldTip on September 25, 2007, 12:34:39 PM
Post by: elkaholic on September 25, 2007, 12:41:47 PM
charlie9289@hotmail.com
Post by: Intruder on September 25, 2007, 02:49:59 PM
Boneaddict,
NOT at all man. I'm very happy with the critter regardless of his score and what not. And believe me, it has crossed my mind about taking 1 too soon and not waiting until later. He just clearly out-classed everything I'd seen so far that I couldn't pass on him.
Question fer ya.... based on the measurements I gave, doesn't that gross 170+? Or did my buddy and I totally butcher the B&C instructions? We were probably 5 beers into the evening when we were reading em :chuckle:
Post by: Intruder on September 25, 2007, 02:57:46 PM
Post by: Slider on September 25, 2007, 04:15:11 PM
Post by: robb92 on September 25, 2007, 04:27:17 PM
Post by: boneaddict on September 25, 2007, 04:41:53 PM
Post by: PolarBear on September 25, 2007, 05:40:53 PM
I use to hunt the Tacoma Creek area for late whities and almost always ran into swamp donkeys. Got a couple of decent bucks there as well.
Good job man! I am jealous!
Post by: Wea300mag on September 25, 2007, 06:16:51 PM
Post by: Timber on September 25, 2007, 09:49:15 PM
Did you call him in? If not, did you notice any rut action?
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on September 25, 2007, 10:14:51 PM
Post by: LongTatLaw on September 25, 2007, 10:43:43 PM
Congrats!
Post by: gil on September 26, 2007, 03:23:21 AM
P.S. I think you were on more elk than we were. Congrats gil
Post by: BlackTail on September 26, 2007, 10:48:14 AM
Post by: popeshawnpaul on October 04, 2007, 09:21:29 AM
On the whole scoring issue...I really don't agree much with the scoring system for moose. But then, I don't agree with the scoring system on mule deer and most other animals because of deductions and so on. Honestly, I wouldn't pay B&C to put my name in a book anyway. If it was free, then maybe. I think if every trophy was in there it would be a good tool to look at trends in trophies and where they are being taken. It's just not why I hunt. I was interested in learning about the scoring system but after scoring my recent moose and looking over trophies and what they score, it seems ridiculous. Of course I'm now being critical and can't offer any suggestions to make the scoring better. Maybe this should be a topic in and of its own, on scoring moose and potential suggestions for a better system...
Post by: WAcoueshunter on October 17, 2007, 09:30:04 PM
Post by: Intruder on October 18, 2007, 08:42:53 AM
Isn't the European system based mostly on mass... it's simple discplacement in a water tank? I think B&C is a little to into symmetry. There are a lot of critters that I've seen that aren't great scorers (in B&C) that I prefer over ones that score real well.
I think the bottom line is I like it.... right?
Post by: jackelope on October 18, 2007, 08:52:27 AM
nets are for fish.
it's all about gross if you're gonna worry about score.
my .02
Post by: boneaddict on October 18, 2007, 08:54:16 AM
I also agree with Pope. I think that BC scoring on moose is not very good. I've seen dandy moose that wouldn't score worth crap and smaller ones that do better. Like I said, who cares, that is a nice moose.
edit......Good one Jack :chuckle:
Post by: WAcoueshunter on October 18, 2007, 11:35:26 PM
I think the bottom line is I like it.... right?
Absofrigginlutely...and regardless of the scores, pretty sure we all like it too. You dun good.
I've never had a raffle or governor's tag. I plan to win the lottery soon, but for some odd reason it hasn't happened yet. :chuckle: Not sure about you, but with that tag I bet I'd feel the pressure to take one that was as good or better than what I could take with a regular permit tag. But I haven't seen pics of any WA bull I'd take over yours.
Post by: Ironhead on October 19, 2007, 06:51:27 AM
Post by: sisu on October 20, 2007, 06:11:17 AM
Post by: Intruder on December 17, 2007, 08:57:30 AM
Post by: GoldTip on December 17, 2007, 09:07:24 AM