# Brow Tine Dispute in Homer

#### Patsfan54

##### Well-known member
Yes, I totally agree with that. In my example, it WOULD be a point because there is some point along that portion of it that it is longer than it is wide. I have just been trying to point out the fallacy in Patsfan54's posts where he appears to indicate that if it there is any point along it's length that it is wider than it is long, then it is not a point.

If there is any spot along the projection that is wider than the projection is long then it is not a point or tine because that would make it wider than it is long, measured of course 1 inch or more from the tip. You can't measure a singular spot of your choosing and decide at that singular spot the projection is longer than it is wide, you measure the widest spot and the length and the largest number wins. If the width is greatest then it's not a point or tine, if length is the greatest number then it is a point or tine.

#### iofthetaiga

##### Well-known member
If the width is greatest then it's not a point or tine, if length is the greatest number then it is a point or tine.
...Unless it's a palm, in which case it's neither a tine nor point, no matter how much longer its length than its width.

#### 4merguide

##### Well-known member
Clearly 3 tines and a shooter

Obviously not "clearly" for some or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

#### Chez

##### Active member
Obviously not "clearly" for some or we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Oh yeah I agree. BUT its "clearly" for me

And it proves how ridiculous this law is especially when so many legit hunters disagree on the same written definition. Heck even law enforcement officials will disagree.

#### Steven_JR

##### Active member
...Unless it's a palm, in which case it's neither a tine nor point, no matter how much longer its length than its width.

At what length and/or width does a point become a palm? Please share the regulation and/or statute that codifies this for my education.

#### iofthetaiga

##### Well-known member
At what length and/or width does a point become a palm? Please share the regulation and/or statute that codifies this for my education.
Earlier you opined that the OP animal's left antler had a brow palm with three points, and "some sort of a weird main palm"... and you further argued that
a fork is nothing more than a "main palm" and "brow palm" that haven't grown extra points. Same story for a spike, its just one or the other instead of both.
The OP animal's left side main palm is not especially palmated, is longer than it is wide, and has no points or tines...yet you argue that it's not a tine or spike, and that there is a brow palm with 3 points. So which is it? Does that left side have a main palm and a brow palm, or just a bunch of random points? You say you're not swapping definitions to suit your whim, so which is it; is that a main palm, or is it a point? If it's not a palm, why not? Lots of contortions going on in this thread trying to argue that pretty much any growth longer than it is wide should be defined as a point/tine... Well the main palm growth of the OP animal's left side clearly meets that definition, right? But you want to argue that it's a palm, not a tine, but that questionable point on brow palm is definitely a point? :lol:

#### mark knapp

##### Well-known member
If there is any spot along the projection that is wider than the projection is long then it is not a point or tine because that would make it wider than it is long, measured of course 1 inch or more from the tip. You can't measure a singular spot of your choosing and decide at that singular spot the projection is longer than it is wide, you measure the widest spot and the length and the largest number wins. If the width is greatest then it's not a point or tine, if length is the greatest number then it is a point or tine.
Wrong, you are wrong. Most points are wider than they are long where they widen out at the palm. You can, and it is a point, if any where along it's length, it is longer than it is wide. That's what makes it a point. That is what the regs say. I have been guiding for moose and talking with enforcement for 30 years about this point. It's on our guide test. (or was).
It says "A point or tine is an antler projection that is at least one inch long, and longer than it is wide..." Not "a point is a projection with no part wider than it is long" The two are not the same, the former does not mean the latter.

Last edited:

#### mark knapp

##### Well-known member
By this interpretation the left side main palm of the OP's headgear example would be a point, not a palm....in which case the growths being debated as brow tines wouldn't be brow tines at all, because by definition brow tines grow from the brow palm and the brow palm by definition must be distinguishable from the main palm. No main palm = no brow palm = nothing but randomly distributed points on a beam = not a legal 3 brow tine bull. Palms are not points/tines...even when they're longer than they are wide. You can't have it both ways...you can't interchange/swap definitions back and forth as it suits your whims.
I don't see it that way. In the regs it says (in yellow, on page 30 ) it says, "Brow tines emerge from the brow palm or near the base of the antler" So to me, you do not need a brow palm to need brow points.

#### Steven_JR

##### Active member
Earlier you opined that the OP animal's left antler had a brow palm with three points, and "some sort of a weird main palm"... and you further argued that The OP animal's left side main palm is not especially palmated, is longer than it is wide, and has no points or tines...yet you argue that it's not a tine or spike, and that there is a brow palm with 3 points. So which is it? Does that left side have a main palm and a brow palm, or just a bunch of random points? You say you're not swapping definitions to suit your whim, so which is it; is that a main palm, or is it a point?

I might not have said it explicitly cIear enough before, so 'll try again, this time with a photo. It can be both a palm and a point, at the same time, in certain circumstances. It isn't a mutually exclusive definition where it can only be one or the other. It's the same principle where "all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares" if you've ever heard that phrase.

Earlier you opined that the OP animal's left antler had a brow palm with three points, and "some sort of a weird main palm"... and you further argued that The OP animal's left side main palm is not especially palmated, is longer than it is wide, and has no points or tines...yet you argue that it's not a tine or spike, and that there is a brow palm with 3 points.

I've read back through my responses and I don't see where I ever said that the left antler "weird main palm" is not a point.

#### Attachments

• Moose Palm.pdf
113 KB · Views: 6

Hose it.

#### Patsfan54

##### Well-known member
Wrong, you are wrong. Most points are wider than they are long where they widen out at the palm. You can, and it is a point, if any where along it's length, it is longer than it is wide. That's what makes it a point. That is what the regs say. I have been guiding for moose and talking with enforcement for 30 years about this point. It's on our guide test. (or was).
It says "A point or tine is an antler projection that is at least one inch long, and longer than it is wide..." Not "a point is a projection with no part wider than it is long" The two are not the same, the former does not mean the latter.

I very well could be wrong. But just to be clear, when you said "if any where along it's length, it is longer than it is wide...That is what the regs say." That's not what the regs say. Once again, the regs say "Tine/point - an antler projection at least 1 inch long, and longer than it is wide, with the width measured 1 inch or more from the tip."

The measurement requirements are 1 inch long, longer than wide, and WIDTH measured 1 inch or more from the tip. The only length measurement is over 1 inch and longer than wide. It doesn't say anything about choosing a beneficial spot anywhere along it's length.

Last edited:

#### Akgramps

##### Well-known member
3 points shot it, gut it, eat it, done.....

#### iofthetaiga

##### Well-known member
It can be both a palm and a point, at the same time, in certain circumstances.
Utter nonsense.

#### Steven_JR

##### Active member
Utter nonsense.
It isn't, but the first two quotes of your signature line really make me want to try explain this to you one more time. If it still doesn't click, then I've done my best and I'll move on....

Big bulls once started off as little bulls, and they carry the same genetics in them from the time they are little to the time they are big. So, using the quintessential image of a fork, its fairly easy to provide an example where the palms are configured in such a way as to also count as points.

I haven't bothered to do an extensive search through the Statutes myself, but my understanding is there is no definition of what qualifies as a palm contained within them. There is certainly no definition of a palm in the hunting regulation book. Meaning, there is no specific dimensions and/or configurations that must be met to call it a palm, or exclude it from being one. In other words, there is no minimum size for a palm, just like there is no maximum size for a point. That is why the overlap exists where (in certain circumstances) the antler projection customarily thought of as a palm can also considered a point.

#### iofthetaiga

##### Well-known member
You can claim that rectangles are squares and palms are points all day long...but the animal you illegitimately kill is still going to be confiscated.

#### t-storm

##### Member
this is hearsay but i heard that the guy sealing moose at homer f&g was fired and people that had moose taken got everything back. can anyone confirm this?

#### Steven_JR

##### Active member
You can claim that rectangles are squares
I said the opposite, squares are rectangles. If you are going to argue against my point, please at least be accurate with counter claims. This isn't the first time I've pointed out fallacy and/or misrepresentation in what you say I said.
You can claim that rectangles are squares and palms are points all day long...but the animal you illegitimately kill is still going to be confiscated.

I'm not claiming. I'm pointing out what the regulations say and do not say. I'm not saying I'm a subject matter expert on this. However, if you are telling me I am wrong, please direct me to and/or explain how my statements are incorrect.

Anyone else want to chime in on where I'm incorrect? I'm here to learn just as much as the next person. If I'm wrong, I'd like to be pointed out where/how I am wrong.

#### cdubbin

##### Well-known member
this is hearsay but i heard that the guy sealing moose at homer f&g was fired and people that had moose taken got everything back. can anyone confirm this?
I've heard all kinds of stuff, but nothing confirmed...my father is taking a rack in to get sealed today, I'll ask him what things are looking like there...

#### Akgramps

##### Well-known member
I said the opposite, squares are rectangles. If you are going to argue against my point, please at least be accurate with counter claims. This isn't the first time I've pointed out fallacy and/or misrepresentation in what you say I said.

I'm not claiming. I'm pointing out what the regulations say and do not say. I'm not saying I'm a subject matter expert on this. However, if you are telling me I am wrong, please direct me to and/or explain how my statements are incorrect.

Anyone else want to chime in on where I'm incorrect? I'm here to learn just as much as the next person. If I'm wrong, I'd like to be pointed out where/how I am wrong.
Based solely on a the photograph I would agree with your assessment.

#### t-storm

##### Member
this is hearsay but i heard that the guy sealing moose at homer f&g was fired and people that had moose taken got everything back. can anyone confirm this?
a friend brought this one to soldotna they said 3x3