Field Judge This One?

2lumpy

Long Time Member
Messages
7,960
I think this might be a younger bull, he's pretty cool.

Score estimates?

49710bull.jpg


DC
 
I'd say low to mid 340's even with the weak fronts. The back end is very impressive.
Tines 13,13,12,20,18
Beams 50-51
Spread 35?
Mass52-54
*343
Beautiful Bull
 
Score=purty, numbers won't do him justice, he's just nice to look at. Thanx for postin him up lump!
 
That bull definitely has the look-I would shoot him in a heartbeat & not care for a second about the score. Having said that, I think he does push 360. I agree he looks like a younger bull with more mass to put on. He has great genes no doubt!!
 
Here are a few more photos, to assist in estimates.

8749width.jpg


25627mass.jpg


25677symetric.jpg


These pics. may help with width, mass, and symmetry.

In these images I think you get a more accurate idea of his main beam length, and fairly good look at his width, although, they always look wider when they are going away, and another look at his fronts and his over all mass.

BerryBlaster, I'll give you my opinion, after you've had a good look at what I saw too.


DC
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-04-17 AT 02:59PM (MST)[p]Thanks BUGLE. Just something to do while we're waiting for some antler growth. ;-)

Here are some images of some extremely large bulls, I wanted to see how long these freaks main beams where, in comparison to the bull in the above posts. I was actually quite surprised as how short they look, compared to what I was expect to see, when I went exploring for long main beams.

This bull gross scored over 500".
8202500.jpg


92224500monroe.jpg


41875headback500.jpg


Here's the 500" bull from the back, notice how narrow his main beams seem to be.

88720wide500.jpg


This bull grossed over 440".

95090443.jpg


27976443headback.jpg


This bull grossed about 400"

67730403bull.jpg


It takes a really beast to hit 60" main beams. We often here that 60" main beam bulls reach clear back to their butt. Well, maybe but these don't and maybe its the angle the people are seeing when they say "when they put their head back, their 6th's scratch their butts. Not without bending their neck a little!!

Anyhow, these will give you something to compare, the very best to the young bull.

DC
 
I'll go 365" to 370". Definitely still has some growing to do but I think that looks like a great bull with a fairly big frame.
 
Me too mmwb. Can't help it. He's just so cool.

I's invited a young sportsman to look for elk with me the day we encountered this fellow, and he got to hear me rant and rave for the entire evening. I'm sure he went home and told his Mom that DC lost his mind tonight.

I know I'm a mature critter bigot and seeing these kinds of bulls and hunting these kinds of bulls, for is just something very different for me than seeing and hunting yearlings. Knowing these kinds of animals are free roaming out in our mountains is a huge motivator for me to spend time in the outdoors. Same with deer. I'm afraid, if these animals weren't out there, I'd own a lot better set of golf clubs.

I'm so grateful that there are a few places we can go see these magnificent animals.

DC
 
I believe he will pass the 360 mark.

"I have found if you go the extra mile it's Never crowded".
>[Font][Font color = "green"]Life member of
>the MM green signature club.[font/]
 
I think this bull is a beautiful elk! I would put him at or just over 350"!! haha it is funny to me how some people class this bull in with the other guess the score bull!
 
Also Lumpy is that bull that grossed over 440" a claen 6x6? He appears to be in the pics just cant tell for sure! Those are some toads for sure!!!!
 
The 500" bull is what has been called the spider bull, off the Monroe, the same unit this younger bull was from, but many miles apart. The 440 bull, is an archery bull that I think scored somewhere in the top 5 in the world, or something like that. I think it may have some extras in as much as it net scored 428, I think. And the 400" bull was also an archery bull, that was running with the 440" bull and killed on the same hunt, it has a long cheater so it would net lower too.

I posted these three world class bulls to allow folks to compare the main beam length of the young bull, to the length of the know lengths of the other three. I think the young bulls main beams are nearly the same length. He is clearly not as massive and his bottom end isn't as long as the 440 bull.

I think the young bulls brow tines and eye guards and even this third points maybe an inch or two longer than they look, because they are so thin, they don't seem as long. Same as his fours and fifths, they look pretty long, but they are not heavy so it's kind of deceiving. His lack of mass is where i think he looses 8 or 10 inches, and he looses 6 or 7 inches in his width.

I'm just guessing, like everybody else, but I'm thinking over 360" but I'm bias, and as I've said before, I'm far more interested in how I like a set of antlers than I am about what a "standard" system may or may not score an animal well, according to my likes or dislikes. We all have out own definition of a trophy, and this bull would be a trophy in my mind, clearly he would come up short for others.

The bull was killed seven or eight years ago and I was told the score from a relative of the hunter but I'd prefer to keep that between he and I. Regardless of the score, I envy the hunter that has this bull hanging on his wall, I wish I had a picture of the mount.

DC
 
This bull grosses 356"
Maybe this helps DC.
24762img0027.jpg

Taken by my daughter on the Wasatch.
 
Your daughter took home a good one Zeke. You raised that young lady right! :)

And she is clearly knows how to put them down quick!!!!!

Just for giggles, for those that are interested, lay a tap on that beast and give us the numbers, in as much as it looks to me like he's got some great tines lengths and a good main beam.

It's wild how the camera lense distorts the close side, in comparison, to the far side.

Thanks for sharing Zeke, you're always a good one to consult around here.



DC
 
I really like the look of that Bull. If I had a tag a saw it I'm shooting. Nice symmetrical rack. I'm guess right around 360.
 
This bull is absolutely fantastic! My feeling as I looked at it was that I thought it could tempt 370, but over 360 for sure. The one area on elk that is just plain hard to judge for me is mass, and this guy's mass, depending on where it falls, could change the guess greatly.

Regardless of score, this is one of the prettiest bulls I've seen. I'd shoot him at first light on opening morning on any elk unit in Utah. That bull just has the look for me. That back end is incredible!

Thanks for posting. I love elk...
 
DC,
Comparing your bull to my daughter's, I'd say the bull you have pics of would out-score her's. With that said, I'm not nearly as good at field judging as many guys are but rather I get an impression of trophy quality based on size and shape.

I'd shoot that bull anytime and anywhere and worry about the rough measurement later just for conversation.

Thanks for sharing.

Zeke
 
DC,
Here's a 383" gross score bull shot by my lovely bride in 2006.
I've included it for comparison to your pic.
935270608248.jpg


Zeke
 
Zeke, that bull of your wife's is a pig! The bull posted by lumpy is a shooter all day, I'd take him in a heartbeat because he has the look, but he's not in the same league as hers. I see a lot of 360-375 number thrown around, but comparing the 2 pictures, it's easy to see the difference between a good bull like the one lumpy posted and a giant bull like you wife's. I still says he's 340's. Lumpy, you said you'd heard a score on that bull from a relative. Care to share, or do you think maybe not because it's exaggerated? I would be curious if I'm lowball because he does has the look, like Berry said, some are just hard to tell.
 
Another outstanding bull Zeke. You folks know how to find and kill big bulls. I suspect you invest a great deal of time and effort doing what you love, and it always shows. Years of accumulated knowledge and commitment will do that for a family!!! :D

Thanks for sharing, again.

Shadow, Berry is right, and he probably sees and tapes more bulls than about anyone on this post, so if anyone has a knowledgeable perspective, it's Berry. IMO. I agree with you both, sometimes it's hard to tell, especially in the field, when all hell is coming down and a decision to shot or not shot is at hand.

There are some elk, deer or moose, in the field, that when you see them, there is no doubt, shot and you won't be disappointed. Others, nope, no need to even look twice, just simply not there. And then there are others, like the video posted on the first, thread about estimated elk scores, and the young bull i posted, you can look and look and look, and you still don't know. I think the young bull might be one of those. At least it is for me.

When I look at this last bull Zeke posted, I see "mass" and his nice long 1, 2 and 3 tines. I see good beam length between the 2 and 3 points and good beam length between between the 3rd and 4ths, but there not a lot of main beam left after his 5ths, so then I wonder, is he 52 or 57 inch long? His 5th and 6th points are nice but certainly not really long, like some bulls are back there.

I can't tell how wide he is, but he's certainly not narrow. But is he 46" or 50" wide. I think closer to 50" but that's just a guess, from that angle. And some times, in the field, thats the only angle you get to see.

Sometimes, the length of a bulls tines and main beams, make the mass look less than it is. Sometimes, they are just so fricking massive, no amount of length will change how how massive they look. This bull of Zeke has both mass and tine length, on the bottom half, but he score 380+ so he's dang sure good enough on the top to keep his score up, approaching that magical 400".

I remember seeing the number 2 in Colorado, typical 4 x4 mule deer, at a taxidermy shop, a few years ago. I think he measured around 216" but that might be wrong. Anyway, he was mounted on a floor pedestal and I walk by him and commented, "that's a nice looking buck". The taxidermist chuckled. He told how much he scored, I said, "Wow, his tines are long but he's not that heavy". He said, "take this tape and measure the bases of his main beams". They were well over 6", but the length made them look small, even at close proximity.

I took a good looking bull that we got in New Mexico into that same taxidermy shop, and asked the taxidermist (a well know gentleman, that has mounted literally hundreds of monster bull elk) to see what he came up with for a score. He eye balled the bull for a second and said, "that's a dandy, I'd say over 375" but lets measure him up". Turns out, he went 348" (as I recall). Funny how the tape is the only way you can know for sure.

But, I've always said this, and still do, and I know we are all different. I really don't care what they score, character, symmetry, mass, tine length, width, height, are all more interesting than inches. Truth is, when it comes to mass, a monster massive, prehistoric mass, doesn't add that much to the over all score, when all the other measurements are tallied. I think, if you want to give the animal full credit for his antler growth, we should be taking into account the mass measurement of all the tines, as well as the main beam, but what the hell, a standard is a standard. Prentiss Gray created the standard for the Boone and Crockett Club and that's primarily what we use to compare, one to another. If I were doing it, I'd use a different standard but if we all had our own standard, there would be not standard. There'd be no way to compare, so I'm good to stay with what we generally use, B&C, but that doesn't mean I care in the least what an animal scores, if I like it, that's all that matters to me. But if we want to compare, we need a system that does that, in one way or another, and I don't have a problem if folks like to compare. Comparisons are different from personal likes and dislikes.

Beside, when the rubber meets the road, the antlers are just a small part of it, right. If we just wanted nice antlers, we could have someone build some out of plaster for us. It the whole package. It the preparation, it's the outdoor environment, is the smells, the colors, the geography, the dry, the wet, the rain, the snow, the flora, the fauna, the woodsmanship, the companionship, the isolation, the dirt, the wind, the smoke, the campfires, the the scouting, the locating, the stocking, the shooting, the meat, the, the, the.......... not just the antlers. The antlers just represent a much larger experience and lifestyle. That's why we must keep the flame burning. Not just because we eat the meat, but because of all that goes into the lifestyle. it's where we came from as humans, as explorers, as seekers, as builders, as a species that accumulates knowledge and grows skills, it's how humans become humans. We need to make sure that we never loose our foundation and our beginnings because it's that inbreed lifestyle that is going to take humans successfully into solving their adventures in the future, be they on the Earth, in science labs, or small garages in Silicone Valley or on some other planet in some far off corner of the universe.

Sorry, got a little carried away there. ;-)

DC
 
>Beside, when the rubber meets the
>road, the antlers are just
>a small part of it,
>right. If we just
>wanted nice antlers, we could
>have someone build some out
>of plaster for us.
>It the whole package.
>It the preparation, it's the
>outdoor environment, is the smells,
>the colors, the geography, the
>dry, the wet, the rain,
>the snow, the flora, the
>fauna, the woodsmanship, the companionship,
>the isolation, the dirt, the
>wind, the smoke, the campfires,
>the the scouting, the locating,
>the stocking, the shooting, the
>meat, the, the, the.......... not
>just the antlers. The
>antlers just represent a much
>larger experience and lifestyle.
>That's why we must keep
>the flame burning. Not
>just because we eat the
>meat, but because of all
>that goes into the lifestyle.
> it's where we came
>from as humans, as explorers,
>as seekers, as builders, as
>a species that accumulates knowledge
>and grows skills, it's how
>humans become humans.
>
>Sorry, got a little carried away
>there. ;-)
>
>DC

Amen DC, amen!
Way more involved in a real hunt than just ratings on TV!
Zeke
 
Thanks for the compliment Lumpy! I don't know how true it is, but I'll take it none the less!

I'd be shooting this bull every single day of the week on any unit, a guy won't ever see a bull put together like that again in his life.

In my experience, the pretty ones always wind up smaller on the inches scale, its tough to judge symmetry simply because there is no real point of reference to start from, I really like it when a bull has a exceptional aspect be it mass or width or a short or long tine, it helps me put him together better if i have an idea of where to start.

https://www.facebook.com/strawberrybayoutfitters
 
Right on Berry, I've never seen a prettier rack than the one Lumpy posted, I'd take him all day long as well. He is a beauty for for sure.
 
Holy Whale Tails, what a gorgeous bull! I've looked at both sides, compared him to the bulls I have with known scores and I keep coming up with a range of 355-365. Score aside, he's a wonderful bull and I'd be thrilled to have an opportunity to hunt him. Any rational hunter should be.
 
LAST EDITED ON Jun-07-17 AT 12:31PM (MST)[p]Not sure how the bull wouldn't break 370. Very long beamed, strong tine length and decent mass. Funny when guys throw out 330s..

He's got some side to side deduct, but just averaging the sides, I get 57, 14, 16, 16, 20, 16 and 27 inches of mass, 40 spread. I think i'm being conservative and if he was really taken, I'd be ready to bet cash that if officially measured, he's over 370 gross. That's one great elk. Doesn't look ancient, doesn't look young either.

Big bulls look a lot bigger when somebody is sitting behind them.
 
>LAST EDITED ON Jun-07-17
>AT 12:31?PM (MST)

>
>Not sure how the bull wouldn't
>break 370. Very long
>beamed, strong tine length and
>decent mass. Funny when
>guys throw out 330s..
>
>He's got some side to side
>deduct, but just averaging the
>sides, I get 57, 14,
>16, 16, 20, 16 and
>27 inches of mass, 40
>spread. I think i'm
>being conservative and if he
>was really taken, I'd be
>ready to bet cash that
>if officially measured, he's over
>370 gross. That's one
>great elk. Doesn't look ancient,
>doesn't look young either.
>
>Big bulls look a lot bigger
>when somebody is sitting behind
>them.

SPAZ, have you ever shot a big bull? LOL
Just kidding, I've seen the hogs you take!

330" is a fine bull but, you're right, DC's pic is way more inches than that. I'd bump it back a notch from your guess of 370" to about 365" (close enough) but I've already admitted that I lack judging prowess.
Zeke
 
The back end of that bull is beautiful. Awesome tails. Good width. Decent fronts. I suck at judging mass. I have to guess he's at least 360. If my wife sees a replica of him this fall, I sure hope she shoots it. Plus he looks like he tastes good :).
 
Beautiful bull. 360 class gross, my guess. A bull like that maybe in danger even on the San Juan this year.
 
I agree with the early posts that this is a younger bull. He doesn't have great mass, and his front half is not as good as the back half. His best feature is beam length, and that adds a lot to his score...he's every bit of 350".
 
Spaz is right on this one, 370 for sure.

It does make me wonder how so many were fooled by the bull BridgerLake posted. That bull would fit inside this one and guesses were over 380!
 
I think BridgeLake's images/video were not as conducive to being able to judge, due to the distance, lighting and angles. The images of the bull I posted gave folks a better opportunity to see more detail, and yet, we still have folks with a spread of 20" to 40". Some at 330, some at 370, so I'm not surprised at the estimates varying so much on BridgerLake bull. And I think it goes to show that, even when your a professional hunter, we often times disagree on field judging inches for antlered animals.

But, it's been fun to compare and share opinion.

DC
 
I always try to hunt areas with the potential for a 350 type bull, if this bull is 330 I'll have to lower my standard because he is a shooter for me any day
 
Although I'd be happy to take this bull myself, because he certainly has that wow factor, I'm not seeing the 360-370 scores here. My two main references for field judging are brisket to top of shoulder on a mature bull being 30", which is generally pretty close in comparison to the burr to sword main beam distance. This bull is 27" to the sword at best when comparing to the depth of his body plus another 23" behind the sword so those long beams aren't over 52" max. The other constant is the burr to tip of nose length usually real close to16". Using that, I don't see over 15" on any of his bottoms. Just for the fun of guessing, I'm still sticking in the 340's, although I did judge a horse bodied 340 bull at 315 once. That was a pleasant surprise.
 
>Although I'd be happy to take
>this bull myself, because he
>certainly has that wow factor,
>I'm not seeing the 360-370
>scores here. My two main
>references for field judging are
>brisket to top of shoulder
>on a mature bull being
>30", which is generally pretty
>close in comparison to the
>burr to sword main beam
>distance. This bull is 27"
>to the sword at best
>when comparing to the depth
>of his body plus another
>23" behind the sword so
>those long beams aren't over
>52" max. The other constant
>is the burr to tip
>of nose length usually real
>close to16". Using that, I
>don't see over 15" on
>any of his bottoms. Just
>for the fun of guessing,
>I'm still sticking in the
>340's, although I did judge
>a horse bodied 340 bull
>at 315 once. That was
>a pleasant surprise.

For my eyes, his sword looks to be damn near centered on his right side beam. If he is only 27" from basw to the sword, he still has to be closer to 55"+ on beam length...which puts him closer to 350".

Some of those angles show the end of the beam to have a slight cork-screw; antlers that I have seen with this trait tend to be longer than expected.
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom