Spike fork bulls (MOOSE)

[hunterdon]

wrong, fake news

That is incorrect. Just make sure the broken off antler isn't too fresh.

[QUOTE=Bugle M In;2100637]Yup, or you are going to have some explaining to do (rich ricardo!)

A busted tine is what can disqualify a 6x5 bull elk if he broke that tine off of the 6 pointed antler side!
But can make a bull moose qualify.[/QUOTE

Sorry guys, I don't mean to be pushy, but I have to disagree. I spoke with a C.O. a while back about this issue. His take was that a broken tine/antler does not make the bull legal.
This issue was discussed on this forum previously and some of the posters claim that they also spoke with wildlife officials and was given the same answer as I received.

That's not to say every C.O. will respond the same. Therefore, to the poster or anyone else in doubt, be sure before you pull the trigger. Better yet, ask wildlife officials yourself and then decide what you feel is best.

Cheers!

[Bugle M In]

[QUOTE=hunterdon;2100681]

Yup, or you are going to have some explaining to do (rich ricardo!)

A busted tine is what can disqualify a 6x5 bull elk if he broke that tine off of the 6 pointed antler side!
But can make a bull moose qualify.[/QUOTE

Sorry guys, I don't mean to be pushy, but I have to disagree. I spoke with a C.O. a while back about this issue. His take was that a broken tine/antler does not make the bull legal.
This issue was discussed on this forum previously and some of the posters claim that they also spoke with wildlife officials and was given the same answer as I received.

That's not to say every C.O. will respond the same. Therefore, to the poster or anyone else in doubt, be sure before you pull the trigger. Better yet, ask wildlife officials yourself and then decide what you feel is best.

Cheers!

Well, no surprise that some CO's think this while other ones say that.
IF a hunter from 200 yards sees a bull and he is a 2x3 and then after it's on the ground you find out that 1 point was broken on the 2 pt side, well,
sorry to say, no one can say it was intentional.

Sure, some CO's will look at it and speculate that the person "intentionally broke it off" etc (no surprise with the odd CO)
But, in court, he better have the evidence that you did exactly that!
If he cant prove it, the judge will let him know.

[eatram]

Just so that we are all "clear", whatever animal YOU shoot, YOU are responsible for. Here are the rules as per the regs 2018-2020... You decide whether or not YOUR bull is legal. They, BTW, changed the definition from immature bull moose to spike/fork bull moose for a reason.

Moose - Spike-fork Bull - means a bull
moose having no more than two tines on one
antler. (Includes tines on main antler and brow
palms.) Does not include a calf. See diagram.


Moose - 10 Point Bull - means a bull
moose having at least one antler with a
minimum of ten points (tines), including the
tines on the brow palm. (See diagram and tine
definition.)


Moose - Tripalm Bull - means a bull moose
having at least one antler with a brow palm
bearing three or more points (tines). The brow
palm is separated from the main palm by the
deepest antler bay. The deepest bay is the bay
whose vertex (deepest location) is the shortest
distance from the antler base, when measured
along the surface of the antler. See diagram.

P.S. Regulations WILL supercede the interpretation of a CO in a court of law. At least it should... but these days... you just never know!

[Bugle M In]

Just so that we are all "clear", whatever animal YOU shoot, YOU are responsible for. Here are the rules as per the regs 2018-2020... You decide whether or not YOUR bull is legal. They, BTW, changed the definition from immature bull moose to spike/fork bull moose for a reason.

Moose - Spike-fork Bull - means a bull
moose having no more than two tines on one
antler. (Includes tines on main antler and brow
palms.) Does not include a calf. See diagram.


Moose - 10 Point Bull - means a bull
moose having at least one antler with a
minimum of ten points (tines), including the
tines on the brow palm. (See diagram and tine
definition.)


Moose - Tripalm Bull - means a bull moose
having at least one antler with a brow palm
bearing three or more points (tines). The brow
palm is separated from the main palm by the
deepest antler bay. The deepest bay is the bay
whose vertex (deepest location) is the shortest
distance from the antler base, when measured
along the surface of the antler. See diagram.

P.S. Regulations WILL supercede the interpretation of a CO in a court of law. At least it should... but these days... you just never know!

Yes, and that's the part where I do understand where Hunterdon is coming from.
You never know.

[hunterdon]

Good replys gys. I remember very well back when they changed the wording in the regs from "immature bull" to the present wording. If I'm not mistaken, or at least I heard back then that what precipitated the change was when a hunter had shot a mature bull with only 1 or 2 points on 1 antler, was charged and challenged the charge in court. Then the wording was changed. Can't say for sure if that's accurate, but in any event, it was back then that when on a hunting trip, a C.O. dropped by our camp and during a long and friendly chat this topic was brought up. He then gave me his thoughts on the 2 point rule.

As both of you correctly pointed out already, if in court, you never can be sure how the judge will see it. Keep in mind also, that many judges are not hunters themselves and probably have never hunted in their lives. I'm not suggesting in any way that they would be biased, just that they may not have any personal experience in the field at what a hunter has to contend with in making these decisions. He can be persuaded by an articulate prosecutor.

[Bugle M In]

Yup, many Judges aren't hunters.
But that being said, they will want to "see evidence".
So, if the CO goes in and says, "the hunter broke the tine off himself to make it legal".
There is 2 things in the statement he just made:
1) he admits that since the bull has a broken tine, and thus is now a 2 point, he is basically expressing to the judge that a broken tine is "legal".
2) what he has charged the hunter probably with, is that the "hunter broke off the tine" to make it legal.
(Now, remember the rule of a mature 6x5 bull elk with a missing tine on the 6pt side, in the regs it is deemed "illegal")
So, you cant have it "both ways".
You are expected to "count tines" and if they aren't there to count, then they "just aren't there!" (don't exist).

The Judge is then going to ask the CO "for evidence" that this was in case the fact.
Was he there, does he have video?? etc.
If CO's are just going around and falsifying statements and saying "yup, I saw him do it" but in truth, was never even around during the kill etc,
(which if a hunter F'd up is most likely going to try and "adjust the tine legalities" right then and there.)
Well, eventually he is going to have a reputation about "seeing lots, but proving nothing and charging many".

One last thing, about Judges being hunters, and it being true.
Well, another way to look at it is this:
CO's are "not Judges"!

That whole Ram thread recently and what was the Rams "legal age" was a big issue because no one could clarify exactly and prove to the judge what
an 8 year old ram is in the case of that particular ram.
So, the judge really had no choice.
The "evidence" was there, right in front of the judge, but he couldn't make heads or tails of it.
guess in that case, the CO's evidence and definitions were a stronger case.

But the tine "breaking off" thus not making it legal is a stretch for a CO to make!
Granted, I believe what you are saying, as I know some CO's will make their own "determinations" of the rules sometimes.
Doesn't make them bad guys, just doesn't make them right.
And most CO's I suspect know the Regs and rules better than the one you experienced and spoke to, imo.

[Mik]

Just one thing to add here ab3. Yes, no more than 2 tines on one antler. But if you see a bull with say one side to be quite large and with several points but the other side with seemingly a spike or maybe 2 tines, be sure the animal did not loose part of his antler in a fight. A bull can have part of his antler brake off as a result of a fight with another bull and so this bull would not be considered legal under the 2 tine rule. Good hunting and great question!

whether the moose loses part of its antler in a fight is irrelevant, i believe that this would be a LEGAL spike fork bull

[hunterdon]

Gotcha Bugle M In. I understand where your're coming from. And, you make a perfectly good argument as to intent on the part of the hunter. Judges certainly do take intent into consideration. But, as previously mentioned, it's not just my experience with a C.O. Others have had the same answer given to them by C.O. when they asked the question. Actually, there were 2 C.O.'s together which I spoke with at the time on this question.
Their explanation was basically this.

The weight of the responsibility to judge legality rest solely on the hunter while in the field. It is the hunter's responsibility to ensure the animal is indeed legal. Example. When a hunter sees a bull with one antler to be indicative of a mature bull, that should elevate his concern for the other antler to ensure legality. Mature bull moose will sometimes have an unusual antler having only 1 or 2 points due to an injury to the antler in the earlier stages of formation causing the antler to not fully develop or perhaps it could be genetically related. It may have only 2 points or even 1 big spike. While I personally have not seen a moose of this type, I do know of 2 hunters in my area that witnessed a mature bull having 1 large spike on 1 antler. But in these cases the antler or tines are NOT broke. This is a legal bull. The hunter can verify that the animal conformed to regulation.

On the other hand, according to the C.O., he explained that when a hunter shoots a bull with a broken antler or tines, whether he did it or not intentionally , he cannot verify upon inspection that the animal did not have more than 2 points on each antler. The fact that the bull by all other accounts was a mature bull (mostly judging by the other large antler) the broken antler would most likely of had more than 2 points before the break. And so the argument here would be one of intent also. That is the intent of the regulation to protect a certain class of animal, (in this case a mature breeding bull), and the intent of the hunter to take advantage of a broken antler. Keep in mind that some bulls will have a broken antler low on the main beam after a violent clash with another rival bull. The antler will be large at the base coming out a short distance with a clean break. This can happen. Clearly a bull which the regs intended to protect. So perhaps another way to look at intent.

With all due respect, I understand your views and really do wish you are correct in how things will go down in court. I really do. And, I am no fan of all these point restrictions we have in our regs. I hate it for reasons such as these. These kind of things makes violators of honest and sometimes inexperienced hunters. I actually think new potential hunters look at these regs and decide it isn't worth the risks. Perhaps, that's what they really want in the end for us all.

Once again, this is not my way at looking at this. It's basically what was explained to me by wildlife officials. In any event, as for me, I'll pass on a mature bull with a broken antler. I don't like giving money to lawyers and courts.
Take care bud and straight shooting!!!!! Don

[moosecaller]

Gotcha Bugle M In. I understand where your're coming from. And, you make a perfectly good argument as to intent on the part of the hunter. Judges certainly do take intent into consideration. But, as previously mentioned, it's not just my experience with a C.O. Others have had the same answer given to them by C.O. when they asked the question. Actually, there were 2 C.O.'s together which I spoke with at the time on this question.
Their explanation was basically this.

The weight of the responsibility to judge legality rest solely on the hunter while in the field. It is the hunter's responsibility to ensure the animal is indeed legal. Example. When a hunter sees a bull with one antler to be indicative of a mature bull, that should elevate his concern for the other antler to ensure legality. Mature bull moose will sometimes have an unusual antler having only 1 or 2 points due to an injury to the antler in the earlier stages of formation causing the antler to not fully develop or perhaps it could be genetically related. It may have only 2 points or even 1 big spike. While I personally have not seen a moose of this type, I do know of 2 hunters in my area that witnessed a mature bull having 1 large spike on 1 antler. But in these cases the antler or tines are NOT broke. This is a legal bull. The hunter can verify that the animal conformed to regulation.

On the other hand, according to the C.O., he explained that when a hunter shoots a bull with a broken antler or tines, whether he did it or not intentionally , he cannot verify upon inspection that the animal did not have more than 2 points on each antler. The fact that the bull by all other accounts was a mature bull (mostly judging by the other large antler) the broken antler would most likely of had more than 2 points before the break. And so the argument here would be one of intent also. That is the intent of the regulation to protect a certain class of animal, (in this case a mature breeding bull), and the intent of the hunter to take advantage of a broken antler. Keep in mind that some bulls will have a broken antler low on the main beam after a violent clash with another rival bull. The antler will be large at the base coming out a short distance with a clean break. This can happen. Clearly a bull which the regs intended to protect. So perhaps another way to look at intent.

With all due respect, I understand your views and really do wish you are correct in how things will go down in court. I really do. And, I am no fan of all these point restrictions we have in our regs. I hate it for reasons such as these. These kind of things makes violators of honest and sometimes inexperienced hunters. I actually think new potential hunters look at these regs and decide it isn't worth the risks. Perhaps, that's what they really want in the end for us all.

Once again, this is not my way at looking at this. It's basically what was explained to me by wildlife officials. In any event, as for me, I'll pass on a mature bull with a broken antler. I don't like giving money to lawyers and courts.
Take care bud and straight shooting!!!!! Don

The regulations does not describe the moose as mature or immature they are described as spike fork, 10 point or tri-palm in the regulations maturity is not mentioned. The configuration of the antler is all that is mentioned.
PS. It does mention calf which technically is a measure of maturity.

[Bugle M In]

I will say this about Moose.
Every other ungulate we have a possible restriction of a "Minimum of" (4pt or better or 6pt or better etc)
Moose is that one that we have a "Maximum of" hunt.
Totally against the grain!

And is how I would tell the judge, fyi.
I am sure many CO's will say it isn't legal.
Probably because they don't want people to get the idea if we just bust off that 3rd point, we are good to go.

But, again, a honest hunter could shoot a bull moose that is 3x2, from 200 yards.
That hunter can drop it at 200 yards.
And at 200 yards, there is now way to have been able to see a broken off tine potentially.
Honestly, even at 25 yards one may not be able to notice it.

Judge is than going to say/ask:
Does it say in the regs that a spike fork must "not have a broken tine".
And it does not state that.

IT states that an ungulate like a bull elk with a broken tine can not be counted to the total on one side.