Post by: JBar on October 10, 2016, 05:35:03 PM
I was watching Rugged Justice the other day and a young man self reported shooting a spike elk in a 3 point area. What I had seen was an elk that clearly had 2 points on one side with a questionable 3rd point. If it had been me I would have been arguing the 3rd point as it appeared to me as legal. To keep the argument to a minimum I do understand if there is any doubt don't shoot but if someone ends up in the same situation as the young man on the show it would be nice to have clarification.
The questions:
1) How is an antler point measured by the WDFW officers to determine if its a legal antler point in regards to deer and elk 3 point min?
2) Where in the regs does it show how the point should be measured? Would it be measured like the record books measure a point?
I'm hoping one of the WDFW folks on here will weigh in on this!!!
Post by: MtnMuley on October 10, 2016, 05:38:22 PM
Post by: JBar on October 10, 2016, 05:41:05 PM
Post by: Bob33 on October 10, 2016, 05:52:32 PM
Post by: highside74 on October 10, 2016, 05:53:55 PM
Post by: JBar on October 10, 2016, 06:14:22 PM
Bob- the regs state measured on its longer side, your pic shows measured in the middle of the point :dunno:
Post by: Bob33 on October 10, 2016, 06:23:38 PM
Thanls Highside, that could be why the young man turned himself in. One was an eyeguards about 4 inches long the other though seemed to high for an eyeguard.Yes Boone & Crockett appears to have a slightly different definition.
Bob- the regs state measured on its longer side, your pic shows measured in the middle of the point :dunno:
Post by: BULLBLASTER on October 10, 2016, 06:42:16 PM
To be a 3 point at least 2 points have to be above the ear. Eye guards are below the ear.Is it that the point of the antler (tip) needs to be above the ear? Or the fork needs to be above the ear? My group god round and round on this one.
Post by: highside74 on October 10, 2016, 06:44:53 PM
Post by: RC3 on October 10, 2016, 06:45:55 PM
Post by: BULLBLASTER on October 10, 2016, 06:46:42 PM
Fork needs to be above the ear. The tip curling up doesn't counti wish the refs were more clear on that one. Know anywhere that clarifies it?
Post by: Davis4507 on October 10, 2016, 06:48:10 PM
Post by: BULLBLASTER on October 10, 2016, 06:51:17 PM
Post by: JBar on October 10, 2016, 06:53:46 PM
If you read the definition of an elk antler point and the elk 3 point definition it seems to be a double standard :dunno:
Post by: highside74 on October 10, 2016, 06:54:32 PM
Post by: Davis4507 on October 10, 2016, 06:55:44 PM
Post by: JBar on October 10, 2016, 06:59:22 PM
Post by: highside74 on October 10, 2016, 06:59:48 PM
Thanks RC3! Does anyone else find it funny that with deer the point has to be an inch and includes eye guards but elk eye guards don't count? Wouldn't want to simplify it now would they :chuckle:
They have it this way to keep people from shooting spike bulls and thinking they had more eye guards. Deer racks and elk racks are completely different in how they grow from a young animal into an adult and it does make sense.
Post by: highside74 on October 10, 2016, 07:00:36 PM
Post by: BULLBLASTER on October 10, 2016, 07:00:57 PM
The whole thing is the point not just the tip and it all needs to be above the earNot doubting that at all but I wish it said that... :twocents:
Post by: brew on October 10, 2016, 07:01:51 PM
Post by: JBar on October 10, 2016, 07:04:02 PM
I don't buy that explanation highside, if an antler point by definition is at least one inch and includes eyeguards then any 1 inch point on an elk or deer should count...period!Thanks RC3! Does anyone else find it funny that with deer the point has to be an inch and includes eye guards but elk eye guards don't count? Wouldn't want to simplify it now would they :chuckle:
They have it this way to keep people from shooting spike bulls and thinking they had more eye guards. Deer racks and elk racks are completely different in how they grow from a young animal into an adult and it does make sense.
Post by: BULLBLASTER on October 10, 2016, 07:04:09 PM
Post by: JBar on October 10, 2016, 07:06:05 PM
Do people read the regs at all?
I read them just fine, they are just written poorly! :bash:
Post by: highside74 on October 10, 2016, 07:07:19 PM
Post by: JBar on October 10, 2016, 07:08:49 PM
Post by: brew on October 10, 2016, 07:13:10 PM
how are the written poorly when it says it doesn't matter how many eyeguards/points a bull has below its ears when it clearly states that for a 3 pt minimum at leats 2 points are above its ears ? it could have 10 points on each side below its ears and if only one point extends past its ear it is not a legal bull in a 3 point minimum area. there are also clearly defined rules on what a spike bull is and what a "true"spike bull isDo people read the regs at all?
I read them just fine, they are just written poorly! :bash:
Post by: BULLBLASTER on October 10, 2016, 07:19:46 PM
The fact that it stated points above the ears is poorly written if they actually want the branch above the ear :twocents:how are the written poorly when it says it doesn't matter how many eyeguards/points a bull has below its ears when it clearly states that for a 3 pt minimum at leats 2 points are above its ears ? it could have 10 points on each side below its ears and if only one point extends past its ear it is not a legal bull in a 3 point minimum area. there are also clearly defined rules on what a spike bull is and what a "true"spike bull isDo people read the regs at all?
I read them just fine, they are just written poorly! :bash:
Post by: JBar on October 10, 2016, 07:21:33 PM
Post by: highside74 on October 10, 2016, 07:25:02 PM
The fact that it stated points above the ears is poorly written if they actually want the branch above the ear :twocents:how are the written poorly when it says it doesn't matter how many eyeguards/points a bull has below its ears when it clearly states that for a 3 pt minimum at leats 2 points are above its ears ? it could have 10 points on each side below its ears and if only one point extends past its ear it is not a legal bull in a 3 point minimum area. there are also clearly defined rules on what a spike bull is and what a "true"spike bull isDo people read the regs at all?
I read them just fine, they are just written poorly! :bash:
You keep calling them points when you are referring to tips. The point is the whole thing. The tip is the end of the point. It's not confusing at all.
Post by: Humptulips on October 10, 2016, 07:36:46 PM
The whole thing is the point not just the tip and it all needs to be above the ear
Not correct. Reread the regs. Two of the points need to be above the ears, not the fork. All three could sprout from the base as long as two of the points rise above the ears.
Post by: High Climber on October 10, 2016, 07:37:46 PM
Post by: highside74 on October 10, 2016, 07:43:50 PM
The whole thing is the point not just the tip and it all needs to be above the ear
Not correct. Reread the regs. Two of the points need to be above the ears, not the fork. All three could sprout from the base as long as two of the points rise above the ears.
That is wrong flat out.
Post by: Timberstalker on October 10, 2016, 07:57:38 PM
I'm not sure your claim that the point has to be above the ear is correct.
Post by: Timberstalker on October 10, 2016, 08:03:02 PM
Post by: Timberstalker on October 10, 2016, 08:03:25 PM
The whole thing is the point not just the tip and it all needs to be above the ear
Not correct. Reread the regs. Two of the points need to be above the ears, not the fork. All three could sprout from the base as long as two of the points rise above the ears.
This is correct.
Post by: highside74 on October 10, 2016, 09:56:12 PM
It does not say at least 2 tips of the points have to be above the ear.
You measure and count a point from the branch of the main beam. If 2 are not above the ear in a 3 point unit you will be shooting an illegal bull.
In most cases a bull with 2 eyeguards will have a branch above its ear anyway.
Look at my pictures that I posted. All are 3 points and all are different. But they all have a branch above their ear.
Post by: JBar on October 11, 2016, 03:26:39 AM
Post by: Humptulips on October 11, 2016, 10:51:49 AM
It says a point has to be at least 1 inch. You measure from the base to the tip on the long side of the point which is the outside of the point. The rule says that least 2 points have to be above the ear to be legal.
It does not say at least 2 tips of the points have to be above the ear.
You measure and count a point from the branch of the main beam. If 2 are not above the ear in a 3 point unit you will be shooting an illegal bull.
In most cases a bull with 2 eyeguards will have a branch above its ear anyway.
Look at my pictures that I posted. All are 3 points and all are different. But they all have a branch above their ear.
You are trying to rewrite the law. Nowhere does the law say anything about tips and nowhere does it say the entire branch needs to be above the ears.
It seems pretty clear to me. You are just including stuff in that is not in the law.
Post by: HUNTINCOUPLE on October 11, 2016, 11:00:28 AM
Post by: gocougs on October 11, 2016, 11:15:55 AM
Post by: Bob33 on October 11, 2016, 11:17:43 AM
Post by: Angry Perch on October 11, 2016, 11:24:49 AM
Post by: Timberstalker on October 11, 2016, 11:32:42 AM
Post by: highside74 on October 11, 2016, 11:39:39 AM
My question would be why don't it just say 3 points at least 1" long on at least one side of the antlers. To say 2 must branch above ear is a joke. Because I would just lay the ears down and say its above the ears or lay the head tilled backwards and say its above the ear. Its a dumb rule just make it 3 points and be done with it.
Because they don't want a hunter shooting a spike and thinking he saw eyeguards. That's why at least 2 points have to be above the ear so they are clearly visible and then you only have to confirm 1 eyeguard to be legal.
People are making it way to complicated. With the responses about ear up or ear down. I showed pictures of what 3 point bulls look like. Someone show me a 3 point that would actually be confusing to judge in the field with our regs the way they are written.
Post by: Man Tracker on October 11, 2016, 11:54:14 AM
Post by: cavemann on October 11, 2016, 12:13:36 PM
I saw the episode and there really is no debate, the guy should not have pulled the trigger. I'm letting that bull walk 10 times out of 10.
Post by: Curly on October 11, 2016, 12:22:37 PM
I saw the episode too and I do wish they would have explained the rule at the time because it did have 3 points. I bet there were a lot of people that don't hunt elk that were wondering what was illegal about the guy shooting that "3 point".
I seem to always find things in Rugged Justice that I wish the narrator or some of the officers would clarify.
Post by: highside74 on October 11, 2016, 12:22:58 PM
I don't understand the confusion or debate.. Most of us understand the intent of 3pt minimum is to allow younger bulls to mature. If at all questionable, let him walk. It really is a case of common sense and ethics. If you are having to strain your eyes or judgment to determine legality, let him walk. An ethical kill is a clear judgment as to whether the animal is legal. In this case a clear branched point on the main beam above the ear and at least an eye guard 1" or longer. The grey area in the regs really isn't that gray and the point is, if the animal falls in that "gray" area, don't shoot.
I saw the episode and there really is no debate, the guy should not have pulled the trigger. I'm letting that bull walk 10 times out of 10.
Thank you
Post by: cavemann on October 11, 2016, 02:20:47 PM
Post by: JBar on October 11, 2016, 02:29:27 PM
I don't understand the confusion or debate.. Most of us understand the intent of 3pt minimum is to allow younger bulls to mature. If at all questionable, let him walk. It really is a case of common sense and ethics. If you are having to strain your eyes or judgment to determine legality, let him walk. An ethical kill is a clear judgment as to whether the animal is legal. In this case a clear branched point on the main beam above the ear and at least an eye guard 1" or longer. The grey area in the regs really isn't that gray and the point is, if the animal falls in that "gray" area, don't shoot.
I saw the episode and there really is no debate, the guy should not have pulled the trigger. I'm letting that bull walk 10 times out of 10.
Agreed caveman...but! How old are the majority of 3 point bull elk anyway? My guess would be most are 1-1/2 to 2-1/2 years old. If you're going to exclude brow tines on an elk in a 3 point area exclude the verbage that brow tines at least one inch are considered a POINT! If its considered a point by WDFW definition then "a spike that has 2 brow tines is a 3 point"! As far as common sense , the WDFW has none and does their best to make sure we can't use ours.
Hypothetically: If you were hunting in an ANY bull area and shot the bull in the picture what would you tell your friends you shot (keep in mind the definition of an antler point)?
Post by: JBar on October 11, 2016, 02:32:25 PM
Post by: Curly on October 11, 2016, 02:33:42 PM
How about this one?
One could argue that all points on his left side are above the ear. Could you not? :dunno:
Post by: cavemann on October 11, 2016, 02:45:06 PM
Post by: highside74 on October 11, 2016, 03:00:59 PM
Interestingly enough one of his reasons he gave for having the rule written the way it is was to keep young bulls that have beenot damaged in velvet and grew extra points because of the damage from being killed. Both of those pictures are prime examples of young bulls with damage.
Post by: JBar on October 11, 2016, 03:09:40 PM
I come from the school of thought that there is an exception to every rule. Those 2 certainly fall in that category. For me, I'm letting them walk as to not have to hope a game warded and I agree on the "exception" on a mutated elk rack. We can agree to disagree and hope that luck would not have it that those 2 elk are the only ones I'd have a shot at... LOL..
So you're not going to answer the hypothetical question...Got it! :chuckle: I'm not arguing the the interpretation of the 3 point rule maybe I'm not making that clear :dunno: I'm arguing the fact that by definition a 1" brow tine is considered a point and SHOULD be counted towards the 3 point minimum. I hunt east side so I really don't have to worry about this rule LOL!
Post by: TONTO on October 11, 2016, 04:37:14 PM