Son's spike- first biggame.

huntFX4

huntFX4

Active Member
Messages
870
My son and I finally got within range of a legal spike yesterday afternoon in the Oquirrhs. I spent 20 minutes evaluating him to make sure he was legal. All points branch below the ears. We only had 2 hours to get to him so we had to hurry up about 1000 foot elevation and sneaking through the brush. We had to back out of several attempts to find a new way to go to stay out of sight. Finally ended up low crawling about 30 yards or so in plain view so he could get a clear shot. There were 8 bulls in the area, 5 of which were a little over 300 yards. I was comfortable with him taking the shot as we had practiced out to 300 yards often. His first hit was solid, through the shoulder. The elk turned a walked a few feet. I told him to hit him again. His second shot was through the lower lung about 6 inches behind the shoulder, but he just stood there for about 3-4 minutes, so I told him to shoot for a back shot to put him down. That knocked him down and he stayed there but didn't seem to want to let go of life. I had told him to leave his pack at the truck, but forgot to get the extra ammo out. We headed back to the truck and climbed back up reloaded, but it was too dark to see when we go back up. So we decided to go back in the morning. He packed out a shoulder with backstrap and did great. I'm proud of 3 good connecting shots. Remington 700 in .270 with Federal Nosler Ballistic Tip. Complete pass through on all 3 shots.
Mom even came out to help pack out the elk. Good woman!
HuntFX4

4ad673717097bd73.jpg

4ad6738e717fb594.jpg

4ad673a672390a2c.jpg
 
Now thats better than any 400" bull. Being there when your son makes his first elk kill will be something that will stay with you as long as your alive!!!!!
 
That's a great hunt! Congratulations to your son and family. This is what the sport needs to carry on. I'm 33 now and killed my first bull when I was 14 and I remember everything about that day and since then I haven't missed a hunting season with my dad.
 
Thats freeking awesome & dandy bull. You, your son and family will remember this forever, and Littlemonster is right with what he said. Being with my son 11 years ago when he killed his first elk (cow) and then with him the next year when he killed his Mt Goat (1st year I put him in) was better than when I got my 400 point bull.....wait...I don't have a 400 point bull (or anything near 400 or 300.

Great job guys, & mom....
 
Thanks guys! This was definately a proud moment for both and will never be forgotten. I still remember the day like yesterday, when he shot his first rabbit and how proud we both were. I'm so glad all of my kids are into the outdoors and chomping at the bit for their chance to go, even my 4 y/o.
 
Congratulations on giving your boy the opportunity to hunt and experience the outdoors. But, I do not believe that is a legal spike. There is branching over 1" long on both sides, thus making it a young mature bull (probably only 2 yrs. old) The proclamation says "No branching above the ears" it does not say branching above the "TIPS OF EARS". The base or burr of an antler is the highest thing on the head! So, that bull should have not had any points on one or the other side except the spike!! I know it is kinda a gray area, most elk in the divisions eyes are "mature" if they have "browtines".

It would suck to see your sons smile go to something else if I am right. But, hopefully I am wrong!
 
LAST EDITED ON Oct-15-09 AT 08:45AM (MST)[p]>Congratulations on giving your boy the
>opportunity to hunt and experience
>the outdoors. But, I do
>not believe that is a
>legal spike. There is branching
>over 1" long on both
>sides, thus making it a
>young mature bull (probably only
>2 yrs. old) The proclamation
>says "No branching above the
>ears" it does not say
>branching above the "TIPS OF
>EARS". The base or burr
>of an antler is the
>highest thing on the head!
>So, that bull should have
>not had any points on
>one or the other side
>except the spike!! I know
>it is kinda a gray
>area, most elk in the
>divisions eyes are "mature" if
>they have "browtines".
>
>It would suck to see your
>sons smile go to something
>else if I am right.
>But, hopefully I am wrong!
>


I put that question out here on MM about the browtines and was told it was legal before we ever made this shot. It says above the ear, so with the base of the ear below the burr, if it meant that then it shouldn't say anything about the ears. It should just say "no points period" on one side or something like that.
Thanks
 
Monster Muleys is not the DWR, nor do they make the rules!! Like I said before I seriously hope I am wrong!! That bull is a raghorn 2x3 anyway you look at it, not a spike!!
 
I agree with big_uns. I don't think it is a spike in anyway but that is just my two cents. Sounds like a great experience and I hope nothing diminishes it.
 
Biguns chill. I'm not trying to start an argument. I hope you are wrong too, I believe you are. No branching above the ears is what we have here and what the regs say. I'll leave it at that. This is a proud moment for my son.
 
Im shocked, that is not a spike! If there was any question I would not have posted it on this sight. Your son did not know better. Proud day for him. Sad day for you.
 
That is in now way a legal spike in the state of Utah. I strongly suggest you call up the local DWR office and turn yourself in before somebody else does it for you. If you turn yourself in, you'll have a lot better chance of them going easy on you due to the misunderstanding.
 
Page 31 of the 2009 Big Game Guidebook lists:

"A ?spike bull? is a bull elk that has at least one antler that does not branch above the ears. A branch is a projection on an antler that's longer than one inch, measured from its base to its tip (R657-5-2(2)(s))."

This 2x3 bull elk clearly branches above the ears and is definitely longer than one inch. The base of the antlers on the skull of any bull elk already sits higher than the ears. Please reference the highlighted photo below and circled red which displays your son's elk branching above the ear.

4ad757252db44fba.jpg


You can look at any bull elk and this is true. Here is another example of the antlers branching above the ear:

4ad75c3f60407eb8.jpg


What disturbs me most is your comment to Big_uns. Your comment to Big_uns reads:

?I hope you are wrong too, I believe you are.?

You ?hope? he is wrong? Well, I "hope" you are not it too much trouble with the law due to this bad judgment.

I am not trying to argue with you here or take anything away from your son but you need to understand that what happened is definitely wrong. In my opinion, this is clearly a 2x3 bull elk, not a legal spike.
 
Just read my post again and I don't want to come across wrong or harsh here. Please note, this is just my OPINION and I am certainly not the law. I will be curious to see the outcome.
 
While agreeing it is not a spike I would not worry about it HuntFx4.

Most of you do not understand Utah law. If there is any ambiguity in the law the fault lays on the state. Yes it is a gray area but any gray area the law maker has to be responsible. You can argue with me all you want but you will be wrong.

You could fight this one and win.
 
In any case where you have to grasp at straws to determine legality, you are always better to err on the side of caution. This is a great example. No matter how you slice it, this is NOT a spike bull and the shot should not have been taken, especially given the time to evaluate the bull as the story stated.

This is clearly a 2x3 raghorn bull and although intentions were good on this with a young hunter, I do think the wrong decision was made. I hope things work out for everyone as this was obviously a mistake and there were no ill intentions here it seems.

I agree with the recommendation to at least notify the authorities of the situation to avoid greater consequences and let them evaluate it. They may have some mercy and let it go as an honest mistake.
 
First I want to say congratulations, and thank you for taking you kid outdoors. But I agree that is not a legal spike bull and with it being posted on here there is a good possibility that you will be turned in. I would call your local game warden and if nothing else have him clear you, or turn yourself in
 
You guys are truly amazing! yes I agree this bull is not a legal spike. Its not a big bull, its not a big deal, its not going to hurt the elk heard, or anything else for that matter. This bull doesnt effect anything anymore than a legal spike does. It was totaly a miss understanding. Im sure the father feels like crap, and will never do anything like that again. Its obviouse he did not intend on breaking any laws. I can not belive any of you pricks would consider turning them in. you will ruin this great momory the kid has with his father. On top of that the father wont be the one who gets punished,the poor kid will. hes the one who pulled the trigger,and taged the animal. Do you guys want to destroy years of great momorys instore for this family, over that little bull? you will do more harm than you could possibly do good. NOT WORTH IT !!!
 
It will all work out in the end, but it is a no brainer no gray area this is not a spike. It is obvious this was not done on purpose and you will come away fine from this expereince. I had a smiliar experience and do know how bad the Father must feel.
 
Ok, I've checked with the DNR. I was told that brow tines being below the ear at alert level, which both sides of this elk were, they are not counted as points. That makes this elk legal. While some may not agree, I made a choice after studying this elk with its head turned in many directions.

I would never make a decision to do something that would break the law. I asked quite a few people prior to this hunt and got the same answer, it would be legal.

I respect all of your opinions and thank all of you for your positive comments. Those of you that disagree, sorry, but I don't believe I did anything wrong.
 
Burd,
It is a big deal because, if the father figure in this case does not know the rules then what is he teaching his kids!!! (right or wrong) Your comment about this basically says it is okay to "POACH" "big deal" Do you realize what our herds would be if everyone of the 12500 spike hunters in this state shot branched antler 2x3's !!! Not one person on here has said they are going to turn him in, we are saying he should check into it himself!!!

Also, instead of seeing what all the MMer's say about this before it happened, Why didn't he just make a phone call to the proper authorities ( it would have taken less time and would have been 100% accurate). At this point I hope he follows up and let's everyone on here know the real deal!!!
 
>Burd,
>It is a big deal because,
>if the father figure in
>this case does not know
>the rules then what is
>he teaching his kids!!! (right
>or wrong) Your comment about
>this basically says it is
>okay to "POACH" "big deal"
>Do you realize what our
>herds would be if everyone
>of the 12500 spike hunters
>in this state shot branched
>antler 2x3's !!! Not one
>person on here has said
>they are going to turn
>him in, we are saying
>he should check into it
>himself!!!
>
>Also, instead of seeing what all
>the MMer's say about this
>before it happened, Why didn't
>he just make a phone
>call to the proper authorities
>( it would have taken
>less time and would have
>been 100% accurate). At this
>point I hope he follows
>up and let's everyone on
>here know the real deal!!!
>


Big-Uns look at the reply just above yours from me. I called the DNR. Specifically, brow tines branch below the top of the ears and are not considered points.
I would never teach my son that it's ok to break the law. We have too much respect for wildlife and the law.
 
I would have the animal checked by a game wardon to cover your butt. (just in case) Because there is no way, at alert level that bulls brows are lower than his ears!! They are not even lower than his ears with your sons knee squeezing them up!!
 
Cool man, as long as you feel good about that being a spike, good on ya and I hope for future reference it will not have to be so questionable!!
 
Don't be surprised if the F&G shows up on your door step. Posting a questionable animal on a public message board is asking for trouble.

In my opinion that is not a legal spike. Common sense says it would be considered a mature bull. The elk has 2 brow tines on the one side and one on the other. I can't believe those would be considered below the ear.
 
Why would you even put your son in that situation?
Instead of trying to find a loop-hole, just find a legit spike.
Just my opinion.
 
I would have shot this bull also.

I think it is a pretty cool bull to get with a spike tag.
 
poaching huh? yes it is wrong but that damn thing is as close to a spike as your going to get with out actually being one. nobody on a spike unit is going to shoot an obviouse brach antlered elk, with no intentions of breaking the law. and this isnt everynody this is a one person deal. if this were a common issue than yes i would be an ass hole too
 
I think its good he is being informed of the mistake he made. but to turn him in on this is doing nothing, no more than a little kid tattling. a real pat on the back deserved buddy
 
Time for some of you loud mouths to step up!

Turn him in if you think he broke the law. Turn him in or shut up.

Just becuase you personally wouldn't have shot the bull doesnt mean he is outside legal limits.
 
This bull is not a spike. It is clearly a 2x3. That has been proven by the picture. What it IS, is a legal bull in a spike area. I have discussed this matter with several fish and game officers. The top of the ears does NOT mean where they grow out of the head, it means where they end at the top of the ear in an alert pose. Meaning all the way up. There is no gray area.

Brow tines do not count on a spike. It may not be what you all think is right, but it is the way it is written and enforced.

Congrats to the young man on his 1st elk. Great shot it sounds like!
 
Don't let them take away from your son's accomplishment. That is a "legal spike", even if it is not a true spike. You can clearly see the tines don't BRANCH above the ear. They extend above the ear, but the big game handbook clearly says "branch above the ear".

What difference does it make anyway? It's no "trophy" elk, it wouldn't make any difference to the herd than taking a smaller spike.

Nice spike!!

Jason
 
Congrats to the young man.

If the DWR did not want this kind of bull shot in a spike area, then they would say no points coming off the spike antler at all. The way they worded it, obviously allows for brow tines.
 
Look people I am not trying to get this guy in trouble, just rather see that he covers all of his bases!!
Now, back to the bull itself every bull that grows from a spike to a mature bull grows this exact way. This is not a unique animal, they get brows on their second year of growth!! This does not and should not qualify as an immature spike or yearling animal. When the DWR started these hunts twenty some odd years ago it stated more clearly about browtines. I do not know why that changed, but if this is really the case then we as hunters should make it a point at RAC meetings to bring this "LEGAL LOOPHOLE" up!!

And YES by the way this is a very GRAY area!!

This is a second year old bull that was a legimate "spike" last year!!

The term spike does not mean branched or forked in any way, shape, or form!!

I am not trying to be an _ss, but just because someone at the front counter at the DWR gave you there opinion does not make it so, I would have it checked. I know for a fact this second year bull growing up is not what the DWR has in mind killing as spikes!!!
 
Big-Uns, while I agree with you on the "term" spike, the legal definition in the UT regs doesn't say that. DWR told me as well as a couple of others on here, branching below the ears is not considered a point. While you humor me with your accusations of my son "pushing the ear" up with his knee, he is simply pulling back hard to lift a heavy head with a very stiff neck, out of the brush for the photo. I placed that ear there to show that this was a legal elk. Though some of you made me question my judgement, my call to the DWR cleared it up for me.

While I understand many don't like it, it is legal.

Thank all of you for your positive comments. My son will really appreciate reading them.

He will learn from the negative comments as well. I studied that bull and these comments will let him know, always be sure, which we are, and I was before telling him it was ok. I questioned it when I first saw him, but after getting a head on view through the spotting scope at 500 yards, his alert ears were clearly above the brow tines.
Some of you make me wish I'd taken a photo through the spotting scope to prove it.
 
Biguns,

The reason it reads the way it does now according to the CO's I have discussed this with (who are not people sitting at the front desk BTW) is because too many guy's were shooting yearling spikes that had growths or mini brows around the pedicle that were over an inch long. This means they were required to issue citations on yearling bulls.

This is NOT a gray area in my opinion. There are very few elk like this 2x3 out there. Most are traditional "spikes" or they fork higher/more often. It is a bull most would pass due to their understanding of the law, but it is a legal bull by definition and I believe there are not enough elk out there like this to worry about a law change.

If you feel it is a problem, the RAC process is the best way to go as you mentioned and I would say go for it. It never hurts to try to change something you feel passionate about.
 
Why in the world the Utah DWR defines "Spike" the way they do is astonishing to me. A spike should not have any forks or brow tines. The debate should not be about this specific bull, rather the asinine definition Utah has! How about no branching (longer than 1 inch) on at least one antler. That is black and white. Again, why the stupid definition? Anyone know?
 
Holy Freaking cow. Turn him in then and get your free tag since you know it all.

Go to the rac's and bring it up if that makes you feel better.

There is no loop hole or grey area. This bull is legit.

It isn't HUNTFX4's fault you cant understand the proclamtion. There are no bases to be covered.

Did you guys not see that 6 by whatever bull killed the otherday on a spike tag? That one is legit too.
 
Big,
Sorry, but it is a loop hole.
There is no way that the DWR wants a bull like that shot duing the spike hunt. Look for changes next year to the wording.
 
WOW!! I can't believe you would try to keep this topic going, that is a "NOT" a legal spike it has brow tines. I guess the state needs pictures to define spike. WOW!!
 
Great bull!! I watched my 12 year old kill his first spike this year also. Lots of fun. I would rather watch my son shoot an animal any day of the week than me actually shooting it. This bull is legal, the reason the dwr has put that rule in is because you shoot a spike at 300 yards and walk up to it and it has 2, 1 inch eye guards, then you would be in trouble. The dwr has made the rule and you were right to shoot this bull. Is it a yearling bull, probably not, but that does not matter in this case, it is a legal bull and that is what counts. Congrats to your son and I hope he shoots one just like it next year. I hope some day to find a big old 6 point by spike.
 
LAST EDITED ON Oct-15-09 AT 03:32PM (MST)[p]So what you are saying DVC is the DWR lied to me?
I'm not trying to keep any argument going, but when I keep getting told that I'm wrong when I'm right, I'm going to defend that. I'm not the only one here who knows I'm right.

Maybe it's a loophole, maybe it's just the way the DWR wanted it, but it's a legal animal.
If things change next year, so be it, I'll still put my boy with whatever the law says before having him pull the trigger.
 
I don't know, but if they realize that bulls are being killed that are not yearlings, wording could be changed.
 
Albubba I am pretty sure the DWR is aware of circumstances like this. Not many, but every year there are older age bulls with lop horns and deformed antlers that get killed on spike tags legally.
 
Andy,
Does it matter how many?
Should we just accept thing just because thats the way it is?
Sorry, that bull should not be killed during a yearling bull hunt. Period
 
I'm saying that for years that has not been a legal spike just for the fact that it does have brow tines. it's not a spike it's a rag horn 2x3 that should have been able to live. Mixed understanding on the wording and definition of spike in the book should be thrown out and common sense should apply. The elk population is on the serious decline at least here in south central utah and it's my feeling that the bull should have not been shot! I realize that your defending your actions and your sons feelings but, come on he has brow tines and was more than likely passed on by other hunters for that reason.

Congrats to your boy and I hope that the wording and clarification is changed in the future to help bulls like this grow up for rebounding herds.
 
>Andy,
>Does it matter how many?
>Should we just accept thing just
>because thats the way it
>is?
>Sorry, that bull should not be
>killed during a yearling bull
>hunt. Period


Al, sorry I removed my post because it sounded condescending. I really don't know about the intent of the law, but here is my point;

The hunter and his dad did NOT break the law. Agree with it or not they enjoyed a great legal hunt together and harvested a "LEGAL SPIKE BULL" although not a yearling, you can hardly call it mature, but that is not the point. If you don't like the law, let's look at it at that level, and not beat this guy up.

I like this site because , as hunters, we can discuss these issues in a fairly civil manner and get insight as well.

-----------------------------------------------
http://andymansavage.blogspot.com/
 
Andy,
My intent is not to beat up the hunter. I to think it is great that he can share a great time with his family.

I guess my problem comes from knowing what the intent of the law is. I for one am done commenting on it.
 
BIG,
If you do not know how an elk grows his rack from year to year then you should not be hunting!! There is nothing NON-typical about this bull!!

I too, am done expressing my feelings about this!!!

HUNTFX4, I am sorry from the bottom of my heart this post turned to this, I was just trying to make you aware, if you already were not!! I am not here to punish or judge people just help if needed and obviously I WAS WRONG.

It would help for the DWR to throw out a couple extra words to clarify stuff like this though!!
 
Big_uns,

Not sure what your talking about or what your point is, but whatever. I never called this bull non typical, just legal. Maybe you should quit hunting.

I do you think you'd be hard pressed to find another bull like this, that fits in the legal spike definition. I dont think it is worth rewriting a definition that works for a few bulls that are the exception.

I really dont see any moral dilema in shooting this bull.


FX4, Congrats and good job on getting your son on a great bull.
 
Yearling bull in this picture? NO, probably a 4 year old bull. Legal spike? YES! The regs say nothing about it needing to be a yearling bull. I don't need to go over the regs again as they have been stated on here a thousand times. If the DWR said that it's a legit spike why are people still arguing about this?

4ad7c74d4cbebe09.jpg
 

Similar threads

txhunter58
Age this Bull
Replies
49
Views
3k
sambo3006
sambo3006
J
The Wake-up Call….
Replies
26
Views
3k
cgmoonsky
cgmoonsky
Founder
Fun Adventure in Mexico - Client Testimonial
Replies
1
Views
598
Muleman1
Muleman1

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos

Member Gallery Photos and Videos!

MTC_0115.JPG
A1AE9FA4-A055-4877-9F14-6ADD6F9E56E8.jpeg
DCEA0F07-F9FF-456F-9EB3-16367A8922F7.jpeg
C816700E-574F-4DC5-8171-6A43B43B8C9B.jpeg
IMG_7167 copy.jpg
Pretty Nice 5x4 Buck
Big Wyoming Buck 1.JPG
20201014_123628.jpg
CC0AB580-90C5-408B-AABE-824EA9A13209.jpeg
0BD3355C-E64B-4EC2-91CB-222556AEE308.jpeg
310DA641-ABEC-4DB8-BD95-ACD164B89822.jpeg
BC38B766-5917-4CAA-B8A8-F7BF1DC6E7D4.jpeg
Back
Top Bottom