No need for fur attached for deer if you have a buck and bring out the antlers. Easy enough to leave a patch of fur on and a skinned out testicle though, the CO`s are happy to see all that evidence. interesting how they changed the requirement, its basically stating you don`t need to retain the antlers on a male, just the unskinned tail and testicle or penis.
I got fined this morning because I didn't know the rules changed back in 2016. I had the whole carcass this time with lots of hair left on the legs but no tail. The head was cut off but matches the neck perfectly.
Well as said I didn/t know either lowband6 thanks for bringing this up for all our benefits. I guess in the future a guys going to have to skin around the base of the tail leaving a strip of fur from the tail thats stuck to a quarter or something, then cut the tail. Sounds kind of petty to me I fail to see what a tail ids that the fur doesn't.
its gonna take a life time to hunt and fish all this
No problem getting it right next time now I know the rule change. But it just got me thinking about packing out just a bunch of bags of meat and the head like I used to.
Please correct me if i am wrong but i read that rule as i am legal to leave tail of buck in bush as long as i have rack attached to head. It does not say naturally attached to carcass.head can be cut off.
I've had CO tell me the following:
If bringing out whole leave: antlers on and you're fine
If quartering/boning out leave: unskinned tail + (penis or testicle)
What goes around, comes around. Think first, and always act with respect.