Curious definition of a spike

U

Utarded

Guest
Now this situation caused me some heartache, grief, frustration, and well more frustration this weekend on my Utah spike muzzleloader hunt. Saturday afternoon I got on a group of 4 bulls, a beautiful 6x7 that was palmated on the 7 side at the tail end, a pair of 4x4's, and at first what appeared to be a 3x1. Now, I was at 110 yards and was preparing to pull the trigger on the 3x1 as it would be legal. I stopped and checked one more time to be sure that he was just a spike there, and he just looked too thick up top so I didn't take the shot. Now, Sunday afternoon I took another look at this bull, and sure enough he did have a point that I doubt was all of 1/2" but I didn't want to risk it.

The curious part of this scenario was Sunday morning I was headed out of camp and another hunter(a lucky sob with a LE tag...) asked me about some bulls and I told him of the 6x7 and naturally my frustration with his younger companion. Well, this guy then asked what I thought the proclamation meant in its definition of a spike being "a bull whose antler does not branch above the ears" and would an eyeguard count? So I double checked and sure enough that is what the proclamation says. This made my Sunday encounter all the more tempting because his 3pt side is a pair of eyeguards and the remainder of the beam, the two eyeguards being below the tops of his ears from where they originate. I didn't take the bull as I wanted to hear some more thoughts on this matter...

Does this definition bother anyone else? I seem to feel that a spike is simply a spike with one tine per antler....

Any thoughts/insights? I think according to the proclamation I could have legally taken this bull, but I didn't want to haul out a couple hundred pounds of elk 3 miles uphill to camp only to have it, my gun, and my truck taken away!
 
You would have been just fine with harvesting that bull. I have asked officers about a similar situation where the bull was a 1x4. I think you should hustle up the mountain and take that bull.
 
I like the definition as is. The reason why is becuase it is possible for a spike to have points coming out at the base or just above the base of the antlers. If you didn't have the below the ears exception then many a spike that were truly yearlings would be illegally shot. Perhaps if the definition of a point wasn't one inch then I might think differently.
 
I could be wrong on this but I think the bull you described would be legal (the tine has to be over an inch) but a bull with a brow tine is illegal. I guess I always thought it was the base of the ear. It would nice to get a definitive answer.
 
Yes, I do think that it could be legal based on his spike"like" side, but I didn't want to risk that 1/2" difference. However, I would see the "above the ear" definition as being completely irrelevant if it is the base of the ear, as I believe that the pedicle is above the base of the ear anyway...I just didn't want to risk it and am curious about other people's opinions on here.
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-07-07 AT 01:42PM (MST)[p]What a confusing and convoluted definition. Sounds like the Game and Fish in your state is trying to make it as confusing as possible. That is not the only perplexing thing about Utah. Here is a definition that makes sense:

Only elk with no branching on either antler and at least one antler longer than six inches may be taken in any season which is open for spike elk only. A branch is an antler projection that is at least one inch long and longer than the width of the projection.
Idaho

Its fair chase, or its foul!
 
The Utah Division of Natural Resources (DNR) has not prosecuted or pursued anyone who uses common sense when taking animals under the definition in the proclamation. A bull with branched antlers is an obvious violation of he spike regulation. A bull with branched antler (singular) and antler is perfectly legal. A bull with browtines that do not branch above the ears and a main beam without any other branching above the ears is a legal bull in a spike only area.
Your ethics are appluaded for not harvesting an animal that you are unsure of and hopefully you will still be able to harvest a spike.
Hunters who harvest a deer with only one antler exceeding 5 inches are technically violating the definition in the proclamation for buck deer. The procolamation defines a buck deer as a deer with antlers (plural) exceeding 5 inches. However the DNR has never pursued or prosecuted a case where a buck deer with only one antler has been harvested, whether the buck be a 5x0 a 1x0 or whatever x0.
On the other hand a hunter who harvests a deer with an antlerless tag with one antler exceeding 5 inches will be pursued and possibly prosecuted. Even though the definition, is a deer with with no antlers or antlers (Plural) 5 inches or shorter.
These are just two examples where common sense needs to be applied in the hunt. The DNR is not out to ruin anyones hunt, their purpose is to ensure the quality of future hunts.
Good luck on getting that bull...
 
I'd get back up the hill and get him. My brother shot a 2X1 2years ago that had a 1/2 nub on the SPIKE side at 400 yds. He couldn't see that with his bino's. He was worried, I wasn't because the point wasn't longer than an inch.

The local game warden agreed with me.

?Here?s to the ones that GET-R-Done!!?
 
LAST EDITED ON Nov-07-07 AT 06:22PM (MST)[p]here it is right out of the proc.

?Spike bull? means a bull elk which has at least one antler having no branching
above the ears. Branched means a projection on an antler longer than one inch, measured from its base to its tip (R657-5-2(2)(s)).
 
I guess that definition also bothers me as I personally feel that a young bull(the bull in this case was quite young judging by small body size) that already developes brow tines has superior genetics and isn't the type of bull intended to be shot on a spike hunt. Oh well, it is all in the past now.

I wish I could go back up that hill, but it is 2 1/2 hours away and I have work everday at 2. If someone knows a spot close to the utah county area that I could do a quick little morning hunt....that would be awesome! However, if not, I had a great hunt nonetheless, and knowing that I could have shot that bull helps versus seeing nothing...and no pack out! Any how, I just think that definition is convoluted.
 

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