Post by: robodad on April 16, 2009, 08:06:18 AM
I have heard all these arguements and just want to be clear !! ;)
Post by: Firing Pin on April 16, 2009, 09:47:57 AM
Post by: Huntbear on April 16, 2009, 10:00:30 AM
Post by: robodad on April 16, 2009, 10:28:06 AM
Post by: huntnphool on April 16, 2009, 10:40:19 AM
Post by: 300rum on April 16, 2009, 10:45:41 AM
Post by: BENCHLEG on April 17, 2009, 09:27:55 PM
Post by: BlackTail on April 21, 2009, 08:16:55 PM
Post by: C-Money on April 25, 2009, 09:04:54 PM
Post by: Bob33 on April 25, 2009, 10:49:24 PM
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.
Post by: robodad on April 27, 2009, 08:13:28 PM
"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 !!! ;)
Post by: Bob33 on April 28, 2009, 09:34:47 PM
Post by: robodad on April 28, 2009, 09:57:52 PM
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.
Post by: Bob33 on April 29, 2009, 07:23:18 AM
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 :>)
Post by: robodad on April 29, 2009, 07:56:47 AM
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 !!
Post by: Bob33 on April 29, 2009, 08:54:17 AM
2000: 3 Point Minimum Elk A 3 Pt. min. elk means that a legal elk in these GMUs must have at least 3 antler points on one side only. Antler points may include eye guards, but antler points on the lower half of either main beam must be at least four (4) inches long, measured from antler tip to nearest edge of beam. All other antler points must be at least one inch long.
2003: 3 Point Minimum Elk: Legal bull elk taken must have at least 3 antler points on one side only. Antler points may include eye guards, but at least 2 antler points must be on the upper half of the main beam. All antler points must be at least one (1) inch long, measured from the antler tip to nearest edge of the beam.
2006: 3 Point Minimum Elk: Legal bull elk must have at least 3 antler points on one side with at least 2 of those antler points above the ear. Eye guards are antler points when they are at least one inch long.
Post by: BlackTail on April 29, 2009, 03:04:57 PM
Post by: robodad on April 29, 2009, 05:03:04 PM
So the "above the ear" rule is still in effect on the westside?? That is one of the dumbest rules I've heard of and as I stated earlier, even the game department in Olympia couldn't explain it. Take 400out's thread a couple posts down in the Elk Hunting category. Look at those pictures. You could make a case that every single point, on every single bull, in every picture in that thread, is above the ears. So WTF is the state talking about???
Post a link to that thread so we can see what your talking about, I agree it's a dumb rule and is really the determination of the game warden weather or not he reads the rule the same as you as to weather or not you will be in court over it, I don't think that is fair !!
Post by: Bob33 on April 29, 2009, 08:13:08 PM
"Above the ears" pertains to 3 pt minimum elk, as in "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 ears".
"Above the ears" does not apply to spike elk.
Post by: BlackTail on April 30, 2009, 06:03:24 AM
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,26149.0.html
Post by: Bob33 on April 30, 2009, 07:02:58 AM
Post by: robodad on April 30, 2009, 07:36:10 AM
Quote
The rules are state-wide; they are not differentiated between east and west sides.
"Above the ears" pertains to 3 pt minimum elk, as in "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 ears".
"Above the ears" does not apply to spike elk.
It looks pretty clear to me that those elk have at least 2 antler points above the ears. I don't see what the issue is.
What is becoming clear is you have no clue what it means either, I can read the rule book so there is no need to paste them in here, You must think we are idiots by posting that it doesn't apply to spike elk............... UM, DUH !!
Now show me an elk where the "Above the ears" rule disqualifies it from being legal in a 3pt or better area. The antlers on an elk come out of the skull above where the ears attach to the skull so there is no point in making this dumb rule anyhow :dunno:
Post by: Bob33 on April 30, 2009, 09:54:42 AM
I agree with your signature.
Post by: robodad on April 30, 2009, 02:56:32 PM
What is becoming clear is you have no clue what it means either, I can read the rule book so there is no need to paste them in here, You must think we are idiots by posting that it doesn't apply to spike elk............... UM, DUH !!
I agree with your signature.
;)
Anyone else think they know the answer ??
Post by: BlackTail on April 30, 2009, 08:54:55 PM
It looks pretty clear to me that those elk have at least 2 antler points above the ears. I don't see what the issue is.
Can you find any points that AREN'T above the ears? That was the question. Are all those eye guards above the ears? If eye guards are considered above the ears then would a spike with double eye guards be legal in a 3pt minimum gmu?
You seem to have a good grasp on this so you should give the state a call and explain it to them since they can't even give a clear definition.