Post by: frazierw on November 08, 2010, 01:02:02 PM
[smg id=9958]
Post by: Lightning_Rider on November 08, 2010, 01:07:11 PM
Post by: ser300wsm on November 08, 2010, 01:16:18 PM
Post by: coachcw on November 08, 2010, 01:19:05 PM
Post by: spookgus on November 08, 2010, 01:19:59 PM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on November 08, 2010, 01:31:35 PM
Post by: frazierw on November 08, 2010, 01:42:28 PM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on November 08, 2010, 01:47:08 PM
Post by: Dadbear on November 08, 2010, 01:49:08 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on November 08, 2010, 02:12:07 PM
Spike Bull Restrictions:
Elk taken in these units must have at least one antler with no branches
originating more than four inches above where the antler attaches to the skull.
An animal with a spike on one side (1x2) is legal in spike only units. An animal
with more than one antler point more than four inches above where the antler
attaches to the skull on both sides (2x2) is illegal.
Are they talking mainbeam or any point? I see in my mind a 3x6 if i read the above rule right.
Post by: Curly on November 08, 2010, 02:20:34 PM
Post by: huntlakewood on November 08, 2010, 02:23:05 PM
Post by: ScottyG on November 08, 2010, 02:23:38 PM
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 08, 2010, 02:25:35 PM
one antler with no branches originating more than four inches above where the antler attaches to the skull.
According to the guidelines it is a legal spike. Because the funky points on the base do not originate (meaning location attached to the main beam) 4" above where the antler attaches to the skull (burrs).
It is however a 3 x 6 if you count all the points.
Post by: 7mag. on November 08, 2010, 02:26:03 PM
Post by: frazierw on November 08, 2010, 02:30:29 PM
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on November 08, 2010, 02:35:07 PM
Post by: Fl0und3rz on November 08, 2010, 02:37:23 PM
1) Elk taken in these units must have at least one antler with no branches originating more than four inches above where the antler attaches to the skull. 2) An animal with a spike on one side (1x2) is legal in spike only units. 3) An animal with more than one antler point more than four inches above where the antler attaches to the skull on both sides (2x2) is illegal.
RE: Are they talking mainbeam or any point? I see in my mind a 3x6 if i read the above rule right.
IMO - it is a 3x6 AND it is a legal spike. #1 above appears to be the rule. And on that basis ("have at least one antler with no branches originating more than four inches above where the antler attaches to the skull") it is a legal spike. #2 and #3 appear to be exemplifications of the rule designed to clarify what is and is not a legal spike.
However, this freak of nature exposes the fact that these examples do not entirely explain the rule.
For instance, the example "3) [a]n animal with more than one antler point more than four inches above where the antler attaches to the skull on both sides (2x2) is illegal . . . ." fails to account for this situation where this elk also has "at least one antler with no branches originating more than four inches . . . ."
I'd hate to be faced with this decision in the field under pressure.
Post by: Buckmark on November 08, 2010, 02:39:02 PM
To be able to tell that any of those branches start at 4 inches or less in the field would be difficult i would think unless the shooter was close and had alot of time to look him over.
I guess i dont know how small 4 inches is... :chuckle:
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 08, 2010, 02:40:53 PM
I comend you Boss for staying on the cautious side though.
Post by: steeleywhopper on November 08, 2010, 02:43:45 PM
Post by: NWWABOWHNTR on November 08, 2010, 02:46:11 PM
Post by: Cougeyes on November 08, 2010, 02:47:06 PM
Post by: sisu on November 08, 2010, 02:47:13 PM
Michelle, a big thank you to you for the abridged description on how to determine the correct read on the antlers.
Thanks again for posting the photo.
Scott
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 08, 2010, 02:47:22 PM
:peep: I'm waiting for the action to start, take cover!
What action?
This is going to turn out to be a thread where the same thing is repeated over and over and over again. Then every once in a while someone will post something like "well I don't know" or "It sure looks like a 3x6". Which will result in more reg quoting and personal opinions about how stupid the spike only and true spike areas are over and over and over again until all our eyes start bleeding. :o
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 08, 2010, 02:50:05 PM
I'm still confused. Does that mean the first tine on the left side is not considered a point because I dont think it is even 4" from the base of the pedical?
Technically NO it is not considered a point when determining a spike. For scoring purposes yes it is a point. The spiked side is it's right antler.
Post by: jeepasaurusrex on November 08, 2010, 02:57:42 PM
How many forum users does it take to change a light bulb?
1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been changed
14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently
7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs
1 to move it to the Lighting section
2 to argue then move it to the Electrical section
7 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs
5 to flame the spell checkers
3 to correct spelling/grammar flames
6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb" ... another 6 to condemn those 6 as stupid
2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is "lamp"
15 know-it-all's who claim they were in the industry, and that "light bulb" is perfectly correct
19 to post that this forum is not about light bulbs and to please take this discussion to a lightbulb forum
11 to defend the posting to this forum saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this forum
36 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique and what brands are faulty
7 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs
4 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL's
3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group
13 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including all headers and signatures, and add "Me too"
5 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy
4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"
13 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs"
30 to say "Magnum light bulbs are better than regular light bulbs"
1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now and start it all over again.
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 08, 2010, 03:03:40 PM
Post by: wastickslinger on November 08, 2010, 03:04:50 PM
I think this applies to this thread and many more on here. :chuckle:
How many forum users does it take to change a light bulb?
1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been changed
14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently
7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs
1 to move it to the Lighting section
2 to argue then move it to the Electrical section
7 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs
5 to flame the spell checkers
3 to correct spelling/grammar flames
6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb" ... another 6 to condemn those 6 as stupid
2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is "lamp"
15 know-it-all's who claim they were in the industry, and that "light bulb" is perfectly correct
19 to post that this forum is not about light bulbs and to please take this discussion to a lightbulb forum
11 to defend the posting to this forum saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this forum
36 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique and what brands are faulty
7 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs
4 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL's
3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group
13 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including all headers and signatures, and add "Me too"
5 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy
4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"
13 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs"
1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now and start it all over again.
Not to mention that it is illegal to strap a flashlight to a lightbulb. Also upon removal of the light bulb from the light it must be properly tagged until all parts are disposed of.
Post by: h20hunter on November 08, 2010, 03:16:46 PM
Post by: Holg3107 on November 08, 2010, 03:20:56 PM
Post by: jeepasaurusrex on November 08, 2010, 03:28:55 PM
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bigantlers.com%2Felk396.jpg&hash=e0ec6d9dea07897f258484618fdc861918940958)
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bigantlers.com%2Felk397.jpg&hash=65da17bd9fd05cf9b76c6c3349f47150e9c6cef8)
Post by: OUTDOOR_BEAST-84 on November 08, 2010, 03:47:31 PM
Post by: jackelope on November 08, 2010, 03:54:28 PM
I think this applies to this thread and many more on here. :chuckle:
How many forum users does it take to change a light bulb?
1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been changed
14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently
7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs
1 to move it to the Lighting section
2 to argue then move it to the Electrical section
7 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs
5 to flame the spell checkers
3 to correct spelling/grammar flames
6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb" ... another 6 to condemn those 6 as stupid
2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is "lamp"
15 know-it-all's who claim they were in the industry, and that "light bulb" is perfectly correct
19 to post that this forum is not about light bulbs and to please take this discussion to a lightbulb forum
11 to defend the posting to this forum saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this forum
36 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique and what brands are faulty
7 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs
4 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL's
3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group
13 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including all headers and signatures, and add "Me too"
5 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy
4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"
13 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs"
1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now and start it all over again.
This might have to be my new sig line.
That is awesome!!
Post by: Gutpile on November 08, 2010, 04:05:01 PM
Post by: C-Money on November 08, 2010, 04:10:36 PM
Jeepasaurusrex, you forgot the 30 people that say magnum light bulbs are way better than regular light bulbs!
Post by: ouchfoss on November 08, 2010, 04:43:13 PM
Post by: jeepasaurusrex on November 08, 2010, 04:53:37 PM
Jeepasaurusrex, you forgot the 30 people that say magnum light bulbs are way better than regular light bulbs!
Fixed it for you! :chuckle:
Post by: remington300mag on November 08, 2010, 04:55:02 PM
Tell your partner or who ever it is a awesome bull and congrats!
Post by: billythekidrock on November 08, 2010, 05:00:30 PM
The weird non typical point ORIGINATES ORIGINATES ORIGINATES less than 4" above the base of the antler. It's legal. Would I have shot it? Probably not. I'd be to scared I'd get screwed by some gamey who as is bad at figuring out the regs as some of the Hunt-Wa members but to me that bad boy is legal and awesome.:yeah:
Post by: OUTDOOR_BEAST-84 on November 08, 2010, 05:04:37 PM
Post by: remington300mag on November 08, 2010, 05:07:49 PM
now i have a question. would the spike side of this bull make it a legal 3 pt or better if the other side was a single tine?
After reading through the rules...I believe it would be considered legal!!! But then again......
Post by: head hunter on November 08, 2010, 05:56:30 PM
Post by: sisu on November 08, 2010, 06:05:17 PM
GREAT Bull!! Getting a 6xspike in a spike unit is what I call a bonus!!! LOL I would have shot it in a heart beat! My uncle got a monster 6x1 long before I was hunting.....it had a monster 6 point side with a 4 foot dagger on the other.....Also, there was a guy in the Mission a few years back that got a 7x1.....right at the end of the spike side looked like someone had stuck a mini basketball to its antler....still perfectly legal!!Now there is the responce I like & expect.
Tell your partner or who ever it is a awesome bull and congrats!
Thank you for being a great sportsman.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on November 08, 2010, 06:08:53 PM
of the antler measuring at least one (1) inch
in length measured from the longest side. Eye
guards are antler points if they are at least one
inch long
Spike Bull Restrictions:
Elk taken in these units must have at least one antler with no branches
originating more than four inches above where the antler attaches to the skull.
An animal with a spike on one side (1x2) is legal in spike only units. An animal
with more than one antler point more than four inches above where the antler
attaches to the skull on both sides (2x2) is illegal.
Ok the wdfw really needs to get better proof readers.This elk by their definition is a 3x6, and 1x6. Depening on which antler they chose to honer on the right side.Congradulations on a trophy of a life time, I had no intenions of taking away from that. I thought this site was to unite and discuss isssues we run into from time to time in our hunting adventures. And maybe try and help fix WDFW when their regs are in error.
Post by: Scott on November 08, 2010, 06:29:58 PM
question for the hunter was that bull killed in the wolf fork by chance ?I'm pretty sure this was taken somewhere in the wallula Junction area?
Post by: frazierw on November 08, 2010, 07:02:54 PM
Post by: Wea300mag on November 08, 2010, 07:09:18 PM
Post by: huntandjeep on November 08, 2010, 07:52:26 PM
Post by: elkbuster on November 08, 2010, 08:24:51 PM
Post by: 7mag. on November 09, 2010, 12:20:30 AM
I think this applies to this thread and many more on here. :chuckle:
How many forum users does it take to change a light bulb?
1 to change the light bulb and to post that the light bulb has been changed
14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the light bulb could have been changed differently
7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs
1 to move it to the Lighting section
2 to argue then move it to the Electrical section
7 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light bulbs
5 to flame the spell checkers
3 to correct spelling/grammar flames
6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb" ... another 6 to condemn those 6 as stupid
2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is "lamp"
15 know-it-all's who claim they were in the industry, and that "light bulb" is perfectly correct
19 to post that this forum is not about light bulbs and to please take this discussion to a lightbulb forum
11 to defend the posting to this forum saying that we all use light bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this forum
36 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for this technique and what brands are faulty
7 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs
4 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the corrected URL's
3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant to this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group
13 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including all headers and signatures, and add "Me too"
5 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they cannot handle the light bulb controversy
4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"
13 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions about light bulbs"
30 to say "Magnum light bulbs are better than regular light bulbs"
1 forum lurker to respond to the original post 6 months from now and start it all over again.
That, is the type of action I was waiting for. It seems every time someone on here posts a nice animal, the internet police show up. Especially when the hunting regs start getting quoted. I am pleasantly surprised that it isn't the case here. Nice bull, and way to know the law. Congrats.
Post by: dreamingbig on November 09, 2010, 06:37:35 AM
Post by: demontang on November 09, 2010, 07:36:02 AM
Post by: BrownGoinDown on November 09, 2010, 07:50:55 AM
Post by: Curly on November 09, 2010, 08:20:40 AM
Post by: elkfins on November 09, 2010, 08:51:19 AM
Finding a 1X6 in a spike only unit is like winning the lottery. 8)
Whaddya mean... finding a spike in a spike only unit is like winning the lottery.
Neat bull!!!
Post by: Curly on November 09, 2010, 08:53:29 AM
Post by: fisheral87 on November 09, 2010, 08:58:18 AM
Post by: D-Rock425 on November 09, 2010, 09:04:21 AM
Post by: WDFW Hates ME!!! on November 09, 2010, 09:10:17 AM
Post by: OUTDOOR_BEAST-84 on November 09, 2010, 09:19:14 AM
Post by: WDFW Hates ME!!! on November 09, 2010, 11:46:47 AM
Then I would go to court and have to prove my innocence. To me it is easier for ME to let it walk.
Nice bull though.
Post by: D-Rock425 on November 09, 2010, 11:47:23 AM
Think I would have had to let it walk. Never know what our friends at wdfw interpret as the main beam...I didn't think of that is the point on the front fork more than four inches above the scull.
Post by: Craig on November 09, 2010, 11:59:24 AM
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 09, 2010, 12:36:41 PM
Think I would have had to let it walk. Never know what our friends at wdfw interpret as the main beam...I didn't think of that is the point on the front fork more than four inches above the scull.
That point doesn't count because it is not attached to the main beam.
Post by: WDFW Hates ME!!! on November 09, 2010, 12:45:14 PM
Post by: b23 on November 09, 2010, 01:06:43 PM
Any of the elk I've shot over the years I have saved all their horns except that goofy 3x6. I'll chalk it up to being young and foolish for not saving it or at the least taking pictures of it. :(
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 09, 2010, 01:17:03 PM
Post by: blacktailer on November 09, 2010, 01:20:20 PM
Post by: ScottyG on November 09, 2010, 01:49:19 PM
Does it say in the regs that a point originating from 4 inches above the ear needs to be on the main beam, to count as a point?
It's a cool bull and I'm glad that this hunter got an awesome trophy, but I'd sure be worried about the interpretation made by the field officer.
Post by: D-Rock425 on November 09, 2010, 04:41:14 PM
This thread is a great read and an awesome bull in a spike unit. It goes hand in hand with a lot of other past threads where many are often stating "If you have done nothing wrong, there is no need to fear the gamies." I think there are a lot of ambiguous laws as well as a few gray areas out there when it comes to F & G violations. I would be in the same boat as many on here and probably would have let him go for fear that I might be doing something wrong or leave myself open to one Game Warden's interpretation of the law. If I did shoot it and I'm sure many on here feel the same way, I would have been a nervous wreck hoping everything would check out O.K. My point is that I feel that a lot of us law abiding sportsmen fear Gamies in general and would just assume stay clear of them for fear of unintentional wrongdoing. Shouldn't have to be that way, but I think it is. I must give props to the hunter who knew the regs to a certainty, and had the sack to shoot a nice bull. :yeah:
Post by: Dan-o on November 09, 2010, 05:11:17 PM
But on this one, I'm afraid I'd have let the bull walk. Then I'd have gotten back to camp and checked the regs and kicked myself in the butt until my leg wouldn't work any longer. Then I would've hobbled back to wherever I saw and it and tried desperately to find it again.
What a cooooooooooooooool trophy out of a spike unit.
Post by: WDFW Hates ME!!! on November 09, 2010, 05:26:07 PM
It has 2 beams? Wich is the main one? I would say the longer one. But there really is nothing in the regs that says the longer one is the main? It would now be up for interpretation.
Like i said before nice bull and good on ya for filling your tag. But i would have let it walk because someone up there hates me....
Post by: Gringo31 on November 09, 2010, 06:15:28 PM
Quote
Elk taken in these units must have at least one antler with no branches....
I see it that this bull has 3 antlers. One of which has no branches.....
Cool bull!
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 10, 2010, 11:54:21 AM
That bull was checked by a WDFW officer as stated. The officer was in a hurry and had several other elk to check before moving on to a new location. He realized his mistake a few days later. Apparently there will be no tickes issued over this.
Post by: blacktailer on November 10, 2010, 02:28:03 PM
Post by: ScottyG on November 10, 2010, 02:34:28 PM
It doesn't surprise me that Michelle got that call. Interpreting the regs can be difficult and often left with room for too much subjectivety.
I wish that there was someone with authoritative knowledge from WDFW that would take the time to monitor a thread on this site and answer questions from hunters without the fear of having a visit from the fish and game officers. It would do a lot of good towards educating people and perhaps provide a useful tool for WDFW to improve rules that leave too much "grey" area.
As it stands, it seems like we are all left with hearsay, 2nd or 3rd hand accounts of interpretations made by game officers, and our own interpretations of the rules. This thread was an awesome example of where that can get us.
Now, let's just hope all those people that read the earlier portion of the thread and are now going to shoot a bull like that next year will circle back and read the end of the thread before they run into a game officer that is less busy.
Scott
Post by: Holg3107 on November 10, 2010, 02:39:20 PM
Post by: tlbradford on November 10, 2010, 02:49:17 PM
Post by: Gutpile on November 10, 2010, 02:49:59 PM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on November 10, 2010, 03:00:03 PM
Post by: Sumpnneedskillin on November 10, 2010, 03:31:23 PM
ScottyG posed the 64,000 dollar question. One of the boards I was on in So Cal had several DFG employees on it. If I remember right one was the Elk bio, another worked in the wildlife branch. They helped answer questions about regs, poc's etc.
It would be nice if we could get someone from our DFW to explain the reason why or why it isn't a legal bull.
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 10, 2010, 03:59:57 PM
ScottyG:
Why does it not suprise you they called me? I was sure suprised that he called me. He called me to tell me it was illegal so I would come let the site members on this thread know it was.
I know I have talked to the WDFW Officer several times before, but havn't in about a year I would say. He said he saw my posts and remembered talking to me and saw my phone number on my signature line.
I thought it was real nice of him to correct me in how I interpreted that reg. We chatted for probably 45 minutes about different regs that get confusing at times.
Post by: Holg3107 on November 10, 2010, 04:08:16 PM
Post by: groundhog on November 10, 2010, 04:11:57 PM
Elk taken in these units must have at least one antler with no branches ORIGINATING MORE THAN FOUR INCHES above where the antler attaches to the skull."
If this bull would have had the browtine without the devil point on it he would be legal. The brow tine branches within four inches of the skull. The problem is that the brow tine has a devil point that clearly branches more than four inches above where the antler attaches to the skull making him illegal. If his browtine would have gone down instead of straight up he could also have been legal even with the devil point.
Here is another way to look at it. Put your left hand up to the picture and block out the big club main beam. What do you see? I see a 2 x 6 . He is very lucky he did not receive a ticket.
Post by: 400out on November 10, 2010, 04:30:53 PM
Well I had an interesting call this morning from a WDFW enforcement officer that I know. I stand corrected. That bull in fact is NOT LEGAL in a spike area. The reason is the kicker coming off the tine. That kicker originates 4" above the burr.:yike: :yike: WoW that was a close one I bet somebody was sweating just a bit :yike:
That bull was checked by a WDFW officer as stated. The officer was in a hurry and had several other elk to check before moving on to a new location. He realized his mistake a few days later. Apparently there will be no tickes issued over this.
Post by: ScottyG on November 10, 2010, 05:21:12 PM
I am pleasantly surprised that someone from WDFW took the time to call anybody to help get this straight. You did speak with authority on the subject matter within the thread and your phone number is listed on all your posts, so that's who I would of called if I was with WDFW and wanted to set the record straight on this thread.
Scott
Post by: Jerome on November 10, 2010, 05:34:41 PM
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on November 10, 2010, 05:37:45 PM
The one Michelle talked to made a judgement call...
Reading from the regs everyone posted, I doubt anyone could tell the true intent of the law... or whether or not it is legal/illegal.
From what I read, the law makes no mention of a point coming off a point below 4" from the hairline....
I wouldn't have shot this bull myself for two reasons.... 1. I didn't know the 4" rule in the first place and 2. Way too subjective and just asking for trouble from the wrong GW.
Post by: boonerboy on November 10, 2010, 05:44:45 PM
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on November 10, 2010, 06:42:36 PM
I'd say the first officer made a judgement call...
The one Michelle talked to made a judgement call...
Actually the first officer was the one who realized he had made the brain fart a few days later. The WDFW officer I talked to saw the picture and sent out an E-mail trying to figgure out which officer was the one that checked the animal in the field. His intent was to correct the first officer and let him know infact it wasn't a legal bull. When the officer I talked to found out who it was and asked hm about it he said that he realized he had made the mistake before he was told.
The first officer just had a minor brain fart. It sounded like he was busy and he probably had 20 other things on his mind.
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on November 10, 2010, 06:59:46 PM
I'm just thinking that the law is subjective even for GW's. Him saying he later realized it was illegal makes me wonder if he truly just had a brain fart or if he later learned some new info that made him change his mind. Either way, just because any GW says it is illegal doesn't make it so, especially with such a vague law.
If you strickly go by what is written in the regs (by what I saw posted because i havn't read them fully), a decent defense lawyer could easily make the bull legal IMHO.
Post by: Jerome on November 10, 2010, 07:02:22 PM
Post by: snowmojim on November 10, 2010, 07:36:37 PM
A point more than 4" up the beam and less than 1” is legal, a point 1-2” is an “infraction” and a point greater than 2” is a violation. What is the difference between an “infraction” and a “violation”?
I was told an “infraction” will garner you a ticket. A “violation” may result in a fine, the confiscation of your animal, confiscation of your gun, confiscation of your vehicle and loss of hunting privileges. And all may be determined upon the mood of your enforcement officer.
And people wonder why a spike with the dreaded 2” devil point is shot then left to waste.
Post by: Boss .300 winmag on November 10, 2010, 08:40:34 PM
Post by: C-Money on November 11, 2010, 09:42:15 AM
Post by: dscubame on November 11, 2010, 09:45:00 AM
Post by: C-Money on November 11, 2010, 09:46:34 AM
Post by: Skillet on November 11, 2010, 10:12:32 AM
Nice bull, but no way would I have shot it because of the branching.
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on November 11, 2010, 10:46:48 AM
Dang, I came in late on this one. I think the law as stated is very clear - any branching higher than 4" above the burr (resulting in a measureable point) is illegal. This bull has that, if that point on the browtine is over 1" long and higher than 4" (pretty sure that's the case). I'm not sure how it can be interpreted any other way? :dunno:
Nice bull, but no way would I have shot it because of the branching.
Is it "above the bur" or is it a point coming off the bur unrelated to the main beam?
These kinds of laws always have some guess work to them IMHO... especially when dealing with an antler that didn't know it was suppose to grow a certain way.
Obviously I/we know what your saying... but it is still subjective.
Post by: Skillet on November 11, 2010, 11:02:26 AM
Dang, I came in late on this one. I think the law as stated is very clear - any branching higher than 4" above the burr (resulting in a measureable point) is illegal. This bull has that, if that point on the browtine is over 1" long and higher than 4" (pretty sure that's the case). I'm not sure how it can be interpreted any other way? :dunno:
Nice bull, but no way would I have shot it because of the branching.
Is it "above the bur" or is it a point coming off the bur unrelated to the main beam?
These kinds of laws always have some guess work to them IMHO... especially when dealing with an antler that didn't know it was suppose to grow a certain way.
Obviously I/we know what your saying... but it is still subjective.
Agree, it's confusing - even a WDFW enforcement officer didn't get it right and he had the animal right in front of him - but I don't think it's as subjective as people want it to be. The mainbeam has nothing to do with it - that's a red herring. It simply says any branching 4" above the burr. That's a branch, and it's 4" above the burr. Doesn't matter where the tine (or mainbeam) originates... as long as it's all connected to the same pedicle.
Could you imagine how confusing this would be if they tried to define "mainbeam" vs. "tines"? They didn't, though...
Post by: 300UltraMagShooter on November 11, 2010, 11:38:54 AM
You know when they make these laws they have the picture in their heads of a textbook antler... not one with a freaky point coming off the base.
I know I'm playing with words here, but so do GW's and prosecutors and everyone else...
I'm not even suggeting it is coming off the burr... or who is right or who is wrong.
Simply saying that it is subjective when such a crazy critter is taken.
Post by: agchawk on November 11, 2010, 11:49:20 AM
They decided that they will not turn around and charge the hunter with any infraction/citation. They are just as falible as we are and it looks like both the hunter and the officer made mistakes in this case.
We are told in hunter's safety and by any sage hunter "Always be sure of your target before leveling your firearm." If you are not sure, don't shoot...and if you do and find out you are wrong, pay the piper. Simple as that as far as I am concerned.
Post by: WDFW Hates ME!!! on November 11, 2010, 12:39:07 PM
Problem is with past and current rules and interpretation of the rule. When i started hunting in the late 80's early 90's it was a branch originating on the upper half of the main beam or any bull. And i think people are reading the regs but they are still thinking main beam when it states nothing about main beam anymore. I think the Officers did the right thing, glad they let it go on this one.
Post by: TikkaT3-270Shortmag on November 11, 2010, 05:57:51 PM
Post by: 7mag. on November 12, 2010, 01:11:02 PM
what action? First of all it isnt my spike... Secondly a game warden came up and checked it out as well and gave his congratulations... Thirdly, you can tell the extra point starts well before four inches above the skull... 100% legal no doubt about it
What action? Gee, I wonder how I saw this coming.
Post by: jeepasaurusrex on November 12, 2010, 01:36:14 PM
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nw-wheelers.com%2Fforum%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Fbeatdeadhorse.gif&hash=d81ef96d3789515e87b4c4678c1c31fad276763b)
Post by: agchawk on November 12, 2010, 02:04:32 PM
agchawk, i agree with you. verify your target, know the rules and you will never be in trouble...
Problem is with past and current rules and interpretation of the rule. When i started hunting in the late 80's early 90's it was a branch originating on the upper half of the main beam or any bull. And i think people are reading the regs but they are still thinking main beam when it states nothing about main beam anymore. I think the Officers did the right thing, glad they let it go on this one.
I was thinking the same thing as far as folks confusing the "old" spike rules with the newer ones. I agree, they read one thing but in their mind(s) they are thinking of something different. That's whay I comb through the rules thoroughly before each season!!!