Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: New Spike-Fork Antler Restrictions

  1. #1

    Default New Spike-Fork Antler Restrictions

    Anybody heard of these new restrictions yet?

    The definition of "Spike-fork antlers" was updated to "antler of a bull moss with only one or two tines on at least one antler, a point or tine originating within two inches of the base of the antler and less than three inches in length will not be counted as a tine; male calves are not considered spike bulls."

    I thought it was vague and confusing before. Now I'm really confused. Anyone have a picture to clarify this new restriction?

  2. #2
    Member akiceman25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Two Rivers, AK
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Can't really see the one single brow tine on the right antler on the first pic.



    Can see it better (?) on these next 2.





    This was taken in an any bull area. I've passed several like this in a restricted antler hunt.

    I think this change will allow many more of those 'oops' harvests to no longer be an 'oops'.
    I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM2K7sV-K74

  3. #3
    Member akiceman25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Two Rivers, AK
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Better yet...

    I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM2K7sV-K74

  4. #4
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bushwhack Jack View Post
    Anybody heard of these new restrictions yet?

    The definition of "Spike-fork antlers" was updated to "antler of a bull moss with only one or two tines on at least one antler, a point or tine originating within two inches of the base of the antler and less than three inches in length will not be counted as a tine; male calves are not considered spike bulls."

    I thought it was vague and confusing before. Now I'm really confused. Anyone have a picture to clarify this new restriction?
    The Wrangell AC felt that a small point/tine originating within 2 inches of the base of the antler was too likely to be hidden by hair or an ear, and thus too difficult to see; they proposed it NOT be counted toward defining a "spike-fork" antler. The result is less restrictive, not more.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    The Wrangell AC felt that a small point/tine originating within 2 inches of the base of the antler was too likely to be hidden by hair or an ear, and thus too difficult to see; they proposed it NOT be counted toward defining a "spike-fork" antler. The result is less restrictive, not more.
    Okay. I think I understand what you are saying. In other words, if there is a (third) tine that projects from the base or within two inches of the base, it doesn't count as a tine. So technically if you accidentally harvested a bull with three tines it could possibly be legal as a fork, as long as one of the tines is within two inches of the base. Right? Thanks for the clarification.

  6. #6
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bushwhack Jack View Post
    Okay. I think I understand what you are saying. In other words, if there is a (third) tine that projects from the base or within two inches of the base, it doesn't count as a tine. So technically if you accidentally harvested a bull with three tines it could possibly be legal as a fork, as long as one of the tines is within two inches of the base. Right? Thanks for the clarification.
    So long as that so-called "burl tine" is less than 3" long.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  7. #7
    webmaster Michael Strahan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 1999
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    5,765

    Default

    I heard the testimony on this, and it appears that this kind of deformation might be genetically-linked. They've apparently seen a few bulls like this in the Wrangell area. At any rate, the Troopers were citing hunters in some cases, and the proposal was intended to clear that issue up by not counting it as a "tine" or "point".
    LOST CREEK COMPANY: Specializing in Alaska hunt consultation and planning for do-it-yourself hunts, fully outfitted hunts, and guided hunts.
    CLICK HERE to send me a private message.
    Web Address: http://alaskaoutdoorssupersite.com/hunt-planner/
    Mob: 1 (907) 229-4501
    "Dream big, and dare to fail." -Norman Vaughan
    "I have climbed my mountain, but I must still live my life." - Tenzig Norgay

  8. #8
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,214

    Default

    When will they clear up the issue of a palmated/paddle antler being able to be defined as a tine (spike) or fork...?
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  9. #9
    Member akiceman25's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Two Rivers, AK
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Strahan View Post
    I heard the testimony on this, and it appears that this kind of deformation might be genetically-linked. They've apparently seen a few bulls like this in the Wrangell area. At any rate, the Troopers were citing hunters in some cases, and the proposal was intended to clear that issue up by not counting it as a "tine" or "point".
    I've seen them nearly everywhere I've hunted, primarily north of the Alaska range.

    The one I harvested.. 15 paces off my front deck.
    I am serious... and don't call me Shirley.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM2K7sV-K74

  10. #10
    Member highestview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Haines
    Posts
    1,308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    When will they clear up the issue of a palmated/paddle antler being able to be defined as a tine (spike) or fork...?
    I still believe it's crystal clear as written in the law, but the misunderstanding comes from that advisory sentence in the reg book.

    Is the third tine rule accepted or just proposed? In just one unit? I've heard of guys getting burned by that. You identify a perfectly legal antler, but you miss a tiny little spine that's practically touching their eyebrows. That has been one of the things I've made a point about checking real close.
    Born in Alaska: The boundary lines have fallen for me in pleasant places; surely I have a delightful inheritance. Psalm 16:6

  11. #11
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highestview View Post
    I still believe it's crystal clear as written in the law, but the misunderstanding comes from that advisory sentence in the reg book.
    Well, my opinion doesn't stem from the statement you reference. My opinion stems from what seems to me to be naturally self evident; that a flat, palm/paddle shaped object is distinctly different from a spike shaped object, or a fork shaped object created by two branching spike objects; i.e. an 8.5 x 11 inch piece of paper is not a spike shaped object, nor a fork shaped object merely by virtue of being longer than it is wide, regardless of how one projects lines on the paper, parses semantics, or the letter of the codified definition as written. But that's just my opinion.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  12. #12
    Member willphish4food's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Willow, AK
    Posts
    3,354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Well, my opinion doesn't stem from the statement you reference. My opinion stems from what seems to me to be naturally self evident; that a flat, palm/paddle shaped object is distinctly different from a spike shaped object, or a fork shaped object created by two branching spike objects; i.e. an 8.5 x 11 inch piece of paper is not a spike shaped object, nor a fork shaped object merely by virtue of being longer than it is wide, regardless of how one projects lines on the paper, parses semantics, or the letter of the codified definition as written. But that's just my opinion.
    Exactly. A bull moose with a flat, broad spike should not be legal while one with a round spike should be legal.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,084

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Well, my opinion doesn't stem from the statement you reference. My opinion stems from what seems to me to be naturally self evident; that a flat, palm/paddle shaped object is distinctly different from a spike shaped object, or a fork shaped object created by two branching spike objects; i.e. an 8.5 x 11 inch piece of paper is not a spike shaped object, nor a fork shaped object merely by virtue of being longer than it is wide, regardless of how one projects lines on the paper, parses semantics, or the letter of the codified definition as written. But that's just my opinion.
    Taiga, I think you are looking at this wrong. The purpose of the spike/fork 50" rule isn't to protect individual moose, even those with antlers of an unusual conformation that cause them to be legal under a spike/fork rule. The purpose is to protect enough bulls and get some breeding out of them before they become legal under the 50" or 3/4 browtine rule. As such, as long as enough animals have the proper conformation to survive and assure good breeding, a palmated spike like Max shot that started this whole controversy means nothing to the success of achieving that goal. The same with these bulls who are spikes with little sticker points around the base. Ticketing someone who takes one of these bulls does nothing to further the goal but actually disenfranchises hunters who are trying to be legal. The real problem that occurs is when a bunch of 30 and 40 inch bulls get shot and left to rot because people aren't even trying to judge a legal animal. Those are the people to go after.
    An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it.
    - Jef Mallett

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,084

    Default

    And as for the need to change the rule, I think this new change actually makes sense. But I also think, the more they change the definition of a legal bull, the more confusing it will become. Sort of like the NFL and the definition of what a catch is. They keep changing it and now the refs can't even tell you exactly what it is.

    As far as moose rules, instead of changing the rules, I think more training for enforcement, on the rule and it's purpose, is a better idea than continually changing the rule because one or two moose don't fit the ideal of someone.
    An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it.
    - Jef Mallett

  15. #15
    Supporting Member iofthetaiga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Tanana Valley AK
    Posts
    7,214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twodux View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by iofthetaiga View Post
    Well, my opinion doesn't stem from the statement you reference. My opinion stems from what seems to me to be naturally self evident; that a flat, palm/paddle shaped object is distinctly different from a spike shaped object, or a fork shaped object created by two branching spike shaped objects; i.e. an 8.5 x 11 inch piece of paper is not a spike shaped object, nor a fork shaped object merely by virtue of being longer than it is wide, regardless of how one projects lines on the paper, parses semantics, or the letter of the codified definition as written. But that's just my opinion.
    Taiga, I think you are looking at this wrong...
    I am looking at this only from the perspective I stated. No more, no less. To be clear; I have no moral opposition to killing calves, cows, yearling paddle bulls, or bulls with otherwise crappy genetics. I am not objecting to shooting paddle bulls. I am objecting to corrupting the definition of a "spike" to include a palmated/shovel/paddle shaped antler. If the biologist's intent is that we kill paddle bulls, then the regulation should state such.
    ...he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods & errors. ~Thomas Jefferson
    I would rather have a mind opened by wonder than one closed by belief. ~Gerry Spence
    The last thing Alaska needs is another bigot. ~member Catch It
    #Resist

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Big Lake
    Posts
    1,588

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bushwhack Jack View Post
    Anybody heard of these new restrictions yet?

    The definition of "Spike-fork antlers" was updated to "antler of a bull moss with only one or two tines on at least one antler, a point or tine originating within two inches of the base of the antler and less than three inches in length will not be counted as a tine; male calves are not considered spike bulls."

    I thought it was vague and confusing before. Now I'm really confused. Anyone have a picture to clarify this new restriction?

    Seems to me that the flip side of this is that you'll have a bunch of morons pleading that the fork horn with a CLEARLY defined brow tine that they shot is legal under the new guide line. What they will read is that a single brow tine doesn't count.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,900

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gary View Post
    Seems to me that the flip side of this is that you'll have a bunch of morons pleading that the fork horn with a CLEARLY defined brow tine that they shot is legal under the new guide line. What they will read is that a single brow tine doesn't count.
    There is already plenty of morons out there that either ignore, or just don't understand the regulations. That is not going to change.
    Hunt Ethically. Respect the Environment.

  18. #18

    Default

    Good grief, I generally hate change unless it is my idea. I hope this makes it easier for me to understand. It's even worse when it is raining. I have to wipe my glasses off, then my binoculars and if I finally decide it is legal I have to wipe the rain off of my scope lens. By the time all that is done it is almost past legal shooting light.

  19. #19
    Member 4merguide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kenai Peninsula, Alaska
    Posts
    9,748

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by .338 mag. View Post
    By the time all that is done it is almost past legal shooting light.
    Remember.... you can shoot a moose in the middle of the night as long as you don't use any artificial light to do so. If you can see it and tell it's legal, you can shoot it no matter what time it is....
    Sheep hunting...... the pain goes away, but the stupidity remains...!!!

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    1,900

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 4merguide View Post
    Remember.... you can shoot a moose in the middle of the night as long as you don't use any artificial light to do so. If you can see it and tell it's legal, you can shoot it no matter what time it is....
    Never shot one in the middle of the night, but nailed a bull with my bow from my front porch opening morning of 2009 at 5:15 am. Nailed one several years earlier with the bow again on the last day of bow season at 11:30 pm. Killed another with my bow on the Escape Route at dark last day of bow season. Packed it out the next morning. No one checked on us. Was kind of surprised about that.
    Hunt Ethically. Respect the Environment.

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
  •