Warning to bc sheep hunters.

[358mag]

Hows that worked out..........?

Haven't heard many complaints other than the high odds of getting drawn .

[dracb]

To me the issue lies with the subjectivity in the words "as evidenced by true horn annuli as determined by the regional manager or his designate".

Someone earlier in this thread made a comparison between true horn annuli and visible horn annuli. Up until now I understood the intent of the words true annuli as to mean not false annuli, rather than visible annuli. I attended Bill Jex's aging seminar at the sheep show this year and one of the topics he spoke on, and had graphs to show it, was the very, very predictable growth pattern of horns. I'm sure everyone experienced in aging sheep knows that based on this universally accepted pattern there is a year of growth broken off this ram in question. So why wasn't the regional manager or his designate able to see this and say the ram was 8+?

The judge cited "had not established on a balance of probabilities the ram was eight years old." This is the part I don't get. If everyone and their dog, even BJ as evidenced by his presentations, knows this ram is 8 due to the universally accepted growth pattern? It's more like on the balance of probabilities (and then some) the ram certainly is 8!

The issue with the current regulations is the power given to the "regional manager or his designate" to legally "determine" what the "true horn annuli evidence."

In my opinion the regs need to be updated to clarify this issue one way or the other. It is simply unacceptable for it to be possible for a sheep to be deemed legal by one inspector but not by another. This rule needs to be 100% objective.

That is why the C.I. can only count the annuli he can see when determining the "legal" age as contrasted with "actual" age. Start counting annuli you can not see and every short sheep become an argument based on opinion. The current system works amazingly well and relatively few short under "legal" age rams are confiscated. The variety of conflicting "opinions" offered in this thread is what you get when people abandon a clearly stated definition of "legal" and seek to apply in an inconsistent manner opinions based on a very wide range of unsubstantiated fact, observations and conditions that are not constant across the complete population of sheep or hunters.

Just use the rule: If I can not see an annuli it does not exist and never existed and can not be used to "Legally" age the sheep in question. The sheep is "legally" only as old as you the CI and the CO can count existing annuli.

[RJHunter]

I would have shot that ram for sure.....yikes....I would still shoot it.

[Wild one]

Well there is one thing I have learned from the thread I have no interest in becoming a sheep hunter way too complicated

[slowjo]

I feel very bad for the young man. However, his age (not the ram's age) is completely irrelevant to his case.

[adriaticum]

Yeah I read this. It's basically Geist's opinion against current biologist's for the province.
That's why I'm always uncomfortable doing something that relies on the subjective judgement of some government official.

[bearvalley]

That is why the C.I. can only count the annuli he can see when determining the "legal" age as contrasted with "actual" age. Start counting annuli you can not see and every short sheep become an argument based on opinion. The current system works amazingly well and relatively few short under "legal" age rams are confiscated. The variety of conflicting "opinions" offered in this thread is what you get when people abandon a clearly stated definition of "legal" and seek to apply in an inconsistent manner opinions based on a very wide range of unsubstantiated fact, observations and conditions that are not constant across the complete population of sheep or hunters.

Just use the rule: If I can not see an annuli it does not exist and never existed and can not be used to "Legally" age the sheep in question. The sheep is "legally" only as old as you the CI and the CO can count existing annuli.

Well said.

[RJHunter]

I don't see anywhere in the regs that states a ram has to have 8 visible true annuli to be legally considered 8 years old. I have always considered "evidenced by" to mean that the location and pattern of the visible annuli can be evidence for what was there before the horns were broomed.

I am no expert by any means but it seems experts do consider missing annuli when aging sheep. Slide 10 with presenter comment.
https://wildsheepsociety.com/wp-cont...rew-Walker.pdf

This is a good eye opener though.

[Walking Buffalo]

Rediculous!

Biologists are arguing over hunting induced genetic selection, some citing absolute confidence that thier studies prove 1,2,3% variance in horn length over 50 years of harvest stats.

And they can't absolutely age a sheep like this one (very typical growth pattern, no anomalies)?

Many in depth study on wild NA thinhorn ram horns cite the third to fourth year growth segment as absolutely identifiable based on THOUSANDS of registration records.

The ram (second photo) shows the third annulus to be located at the 7 o'clock position.

By the wording of BC legislation, this is a Legal ram.

[Alpine85]

Agree with the lines in the last picture, there has to be growth at the base for the current year. So either 7 or 8, depending on how much credit is given to the broomed off portion.
If Govt claims the first ring at the tip is actually the first years growth, they had better have supporting evidence from rams in the same area sporting similar size lamb tips, with similar large circumference

Reaaly surprised Geist would suggest that maybe two or more years are broomed off.

They called that ring closest to the tip the 1st year bulge and the next ring the 2nd year. Only thing I find really odd is that gives this kids ram 9 1/2” circumference at his 2nd year. A couple of the heavy 170+ inch rams we’ve killed have the tips so the 2nd year isn’t questionable.The circumference on my rams 2nd year is 6 1/2”. So I just struggle with how this ram would have 3” bigger 2nd year circumference compared to two rams with 15-15.25 inch bases.

Then if we look at the kids rams growth between 2 and 3, he grew 5 1/2” in length. That kind of growth is typical of a ram between 3rd and 4th years. A ram with superior growth would be 8+” between his 2nd to 3rd year as these are always the strong growth in length years ?