Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 310

Thread: Legal or not?

  1. #1
    Member AKhuntfishtrap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Southcentral, AK
    Posts
    77

    Default Legal or not?

    Taken in unit 20D.

  2. #2

    Default

    I would think it's only got a fork so it would be legal but that's a little close for comfort...

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    Member highestview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Haines
    Posts
    1,270

    Default

    That right side is absolutely legal IMO. To be not legal its must have 3 points which must be BOTH "longer than 1 inch" and "longer than it is wide." That right side clearly has 2 points which are over 1 inch long and longer than they are wide. Presence of palmation does not take away from that.
    Born in Alaska: The boundary lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; surely I have a delightful inheritance. Psalm 16:6

  4. #4
    Member skybust's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    alaska
    Posts
    2,295

    Default

    I would say good eaten and its legal
    Is it opening day of duck season yet
    Member of Alaska Waterfowl Association

  5. #5
    Member highestview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Haines
    Posts
    1,270

    Default

    As I see it. I'm not a lawyer, or a trooper.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Born in Alaska: The boundary lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; surely I have a delightful inheritance. Psalm 16:6

  6. #6
    Member Steven_JR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    242

    Default

    I'll start by clarifying that I've never taken a moose, so my experience is definitely limited, but I agree with the others that this one appears legal as a fork.

    If presented with the opportunity, I would shoot.

  7. #7
    Member AKhuntfishtrap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Southcentral, AK
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Argued with trooper Art Cummings, but he still took the rifle and meat away and gave a ticket. Thanks for your opinions.

  8. #8
    Member AKhuntfishtrap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Southcentral, AK
    Posts
    77

    Default

    And a local biologist also agreed it was a fork...

  9. #9
    Member Frostbitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Alaska - I wasn't born here, but I got here as soon as I could!
    Posts
    3,183

    Default

    I can't be sure from the pic, but is the right side broken at all? I was of the understanding that if the antler is broken or otherwise modified to result in a fork (read as a point broken or cut off), then it isn't considered a legal moose.

  10. #10
    Member Steven_JR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    242

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frostbitten View Post
    I can't be sure from the pic, but is the right side broken at all? I was of the understanding that if the antler is broken or otherwise modified to result in a fork (read as a point broken or cut off), then it isn't considered a legal moose.
    I don't have the regulation book in front of me, but I thought that the broken antler caveat only applied in parts of Units 1, 2, and 3.

    I agree the antler looks broken/broomed along the edges.

  11. #11
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,012

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxBasargin View Post
    Argued with trooper Art Cummings, but he still took the rifle and meat away and gave a ticket. Thanks for your opinions.
    Are you going to contest the seizure and ticket in court? Boy, I'd be letting them know in no uncertain terms that I'd expect the meat back as well if I was found to be legal.

    Did you stretch a tape on the length and width of each point? If both sides are indeed longer than they are wide, then it should be legal.

  12. #12
    Member AKhuntfishtrap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Southcentral, AK
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frostbitten View Post
    I can't be sure from the pic, but is the right side broken at all? I was of the understanding that if the antler is broken or otherwise modified to result in a fork (read as a point broken or cut off), then it isn't considered a legal moose.
    In the regulations it says a damaged, broken or altered antler makes it not a spike/fork in units 1b 1c and 3.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxBasargin View Post
    Argued with trooper Art Cummings, but he still took the rifle and meat away and gave a ticket. Thanks for your opinions.
    The regs specifically state that bulls with palmated horns (paddles) are seldom legal under the spike fork requirement. Doesn't explain any further. I'd call those antlers palmated and thus not legal.

  14. #14
    Member AKhuntfishtrap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Southcentral, AK
    Posts
    77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian M View Post
    Are you going to contest the seizure and ticket in court? Boy, I'd be letting them know in no uncertain terms that I'd expect the meat back as well if I was found to be legal.

    Did you stretch a tape on the length and width of each point? If both sides are indeed longer than they are wide, then it should be legal.
    We are planning to fight it in court, and yes the points proved to be longer than they are wide.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highestview View Post
    That right side is absolutely legal IMO. To be not legal its must have 3 points which must be BOTH "longer than 1 inch" and "longer than it is wide." That right side clearly has 2 points which are over 1 inch long and longer than they are wide. Presence of palmation does not take away from that.
    I'm not totally convinced that the right side has 2 clearly defined points. The one towards the back may not be longer than it is wide. It looks pretty close, but may not make that requirement. If it isn't, then you have an odd situation with only one defined point and another projection off the side. Does that make it a spike? I'm not totally clear on that though.

    I don't see a clear enough view of the left side antler to say whether it would be a fork or not.

    EDIT: I see that the OP just mentioned that they did confirm the measurement of the length/width and that it was longer than it was wide. If that's the case, then I would agree that it is likely a legal fork.

  16. #16
    Forum Admin Brian M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Eagle River, AK
    Posts
    13,012

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayz12 View Post
    The regs specifically state that bulls with palmated horns (paddles) are seldom legal under the spike fork requirement. Doesn't explain any further. I'd call those antlers palmated and thus not legal.
    The key word there is "seldom". That means that they sometimes are legal. In this case, if both points are longer than they are wide, then they are in fact legal by the regulation's definition. This would be one of those "seldom" cases.

  17. #17
    Member highestview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Haines
    Posts
    1,270

    Default Legal or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayz12 View Post
    The regs specifically state that bulls with palmated horns (paddles) are seldom legal under the spike fork requirement. Doesn't explain any further. I'd call those antlers palmated and thus not legal.
    "Seldom" not always. That antler has 2 distinct points, which by the regs page is a fork, which is legal. Regs don't address a maximum width of a point or what defines 'palmation' rather than flat points like the one pictured above.

    I'm going to dig up the actual AAC code and see if it clarifies any further. If I was the OP, I would be fighting this one hard.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Born in Alaska: The boundary lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; surely I have a delightful inheritance. Psalm 16:6

  18. #18
    Member skybust's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    alaska
    Posts
    2,295

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxBasargin View Post
    And a local biologist also agreed it was a fork...
    Get the biologist name and have him come to court with you. Im a LEO and I would have to agree with you that it is legal.
    Is it opening day of duck season yet
    Member of Alaska Waterfowl Association

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxBasargin View Post
    We are planning to fight it in court, and yes the points proved to be longer than they are wide.
    If you don't mind posting it, what were the measurements? It looks like it would be pretty close in the photo.

  20. #20
    Member highestview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Haines
    Posts
    1,270

    Default Legal or not?

    5 AAC 92.990. Definitions
    (B) "spike-fork antler" means an antler of a bull moose with only one or two tines; male calves are not spike-fork bulls;

    The word 'palm' or 'palmation' is nowhere in the definition of a spike-fork antler, therefore, presence of palm can't negate the requirements, right? It's such a common misconception about spike forks, IMO. Apparently even among troopers. Man I'm really sorry. I'd have my lawyer beat him to the station and fight the thing. Just as I see it

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Born in Alaska: The boundary lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; surely I have a delightful inheritance. Psalm 16:6

Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •