#4 Antlered vs Antlerless
 

So, as promised I am putting forth some suggestions for changes that I would like to see happen with our regs. This time I will not try to defend my suggestion or argue my position. In my mind this suggestion has merit. This is how it works in BC, but that does not mean that I think all of BC regs. are better then ours or that I will move to BC if none of my suggestions are implemented. Actually I'm kind of hopeing that someone at F&W or AEP that I am sure read the threads here on AO might pass my suggestions along to those who make policies and or reg. changes. Anyways......
..4.. Regulation on whether a Deer is Antlered or Antlerless. Right now if you are trying to harvest an Antlerless deer and you shoot one that has one antler 2" long and one a little longer then 4", you have committed a crime. I think this is backwards. In BC (yeh I know, flame away) and probably other places if ONE antler is less then the legal length then it is considered Antlerless. So, if you are glassing that deer and see no antlers, or just a small nub and shoot it thinking you have shot an Antlerless deer and then walk up and see that on the side that was facing away from you it has a 4 1/2" antler then here in AB you can be in big trouble. You can argue that the hunter was irresponsible by not waiting to glass or scope both sides, or he shouldn't have shot at all, but in the field a lot of times you have an animal standing broadside to you and have to make a decision based on what you can see. Just seems to make more sense if the reg. was written the other way around. Much less chance of error, and I doubt it would hurt the spikers out there.
Here is a pic of a Whitetail "buck" that a hunter shot thinking it was Antlerless. The small (and legal) 3" antler was hiding behind the ear that was broadside to hunter, and that 5" antler was sticking straight out away from hunter and could not be seen. Legally, in AB this was an Antlered deer.
Feedback welcome on this reg suggestion but I will not type another word on this thread. Flame away guys.
P.S. I'll leave it to the ussual suspects to speculate what tag was put on this animal.

If you have doubt don't pull the trigger.

How badly does one need to put meat on the table?

The obvious solution, to a problem that shouldn't exist.:)

X 2 ^

How often does this happen?
I'm gonna say next to never.
And as far as what tag? Anything other an as antlered is wrong.

X2

If I seen any antler on the head I consider it antlered till I can measure otherwise. If I was looking to fill a sup tag I would never shoot anything that had antler visible.

I'm gonna have to start eating more carrots to see the difference of fractions of an inch on deers head.

I guess that it needs repeating.

Sorry. I was agreeing with him.

As was everyone but the OP, who is suggesting a solution to a problem that doesn't exist for any responsible hunter, who doesn't shoot, unless he has properly identified his target.:)

You have to do that now.

The fact of the matter is that as it stand now AND if the OP's suggestion is implemented, it still comes down to judging antler and making a judgment. You could misjudge the shorter or longer antler. If it's close you have to be careful. Frankly it`s why I`ve never pulled the trigger on an bighorn ewe. I`m not that confident I`m looking at an ewe and not a young male. I think it takes more practice and knowledge than I currently have.

Year before last an acquaintance thought he had filled his antlerless tag. However when he walked up to the downed animal he found that he haid actually filled his antlered tag... with a pathetic little spiker. Darn lucky he had both tags in his pocket. Perhaps that knowledge prompted him to be less observant than he should have been. Lesson learned.

Nope. I don't shoot does.

Bottom Line is that if it had a sticker more than 4" it's antlered .
If a person is looking at filling an antler less tag they had better be sure both are less than 4". If they want to shoot a spiker , make sure it's legal!
Squeakers don't cut it...,
Cat

So have you ever considered actively getting involved with AFGA and bringing your suggestions up through the meetings so AFGA can and does bring ideas for regulations changes forward on behalf of the full hunting / fishing population in Alberta?

And no I do not support or like your idea on a change to the regulation on the length of antler's Make a mistake be honest and call it in right away. The onus is on the shooter to have the right optics and take the correct amount of time to make sure before the trigger is pulled.

What is it considered if it is missing one side of Antler but the Antler it does have is quite large? I should be able to shoot a big bull moose on an Antlerless tag if he is missing one side of antler yet is he wasn't he'd go 60" wide? That just doesn't seem right.

Nope, he could have a deformed antler( seen that before) but if the bull had one antler of legal size it is a bull , period.
No amount of "what if's" make a difference :thinking-006:
Cat

does anyone happen to know the punishment for this? I personally think the current law is fine. However I don't think its worth someone losing his truck/gun/hunting privileges over 1/2" of antler, as long as the punishment fits the crime it's probably fine the way its written.

If you see a deer with Antlers that looks close to 4" and you have an Antlerless tag, you probably should not shoot it.

I hate to see deer wasted because of a mistake being made, like when the 3 point rule on MD was brought in.

Fortunately spikes are usually well over 6" in length leaving very few that are questionable, so I don't see the need to change the regs.

I am aware of three incidents of this. None of them that I was directly involved in. One on an antelope - young male shot as a antlerless -- guy turned himself in, got to keep the antelope but lost his hunting privileges for the next year - no fine, young bull moose -- nothing on one side - fork on the other called in right away, inspected and nothing further, spike MD buck on one side very small no fork - nothing on the other shot as antlerless -- called in and was told to keep it and note that he spoke with **** -- no issues.

I do not think there is a hard and fast rule. It will be up to the Wildlife officer, your honesty and approach.


The 3 point rule on MD resulted in a lot of waste. That was a bad regulation and really hurt the herd for a long time.

No need to speculate how it was tagged....pretty sure you started a thread on it a couple years ago.

LC

I think I would be okay with this.
A related variation:
On Meateater, Rinella is hunting sheep in Alaska, and the rules allow for any double-broomed ram to be harvested, based on the fact that animal isn't going to reach legal. This is something that I have heard about in the discussions on this forum about the changes in the curl regs.
Another thing to think about: 4" is easy to spot on a whitetail, but on a moose or elk? That could easily be hidden. The ears on a moose are 6" long on even a calf.

I know a fella who shot a mule feer in a Zone closed to them , but the person he was with said it was okay to shoot it,
Cost him the deer and a fine with no suspension .
He reported it himself and went to court to plead his case .
He is in fact s lawyer but put his faith in the person that he was hunting with instead of making sure they were in a legal zone himself!:thinking-006:
Cat

Thanks, that's what I somewhat expected. The year of hunting seems a bit harsh but I'm guessing that's because it was an antelope.

It seems ridiculous.

Because it is! Rules are fine the way they are and completely clear if you have any basic understanding.

LC

X2

Shoot the extra inch or 2 off prior to field dressing and call it good.

So a mature buck with one antler broke off at the base would be legal on an anterless tag...........makes no sense......from a game management perspective....know what your shooting at before you pull the trigger.

Exactly. I see no issues with the current regulations. They're straightforward and practical. In very rare cases where hunters who make a mistake as a result of this regulation should report the incident and if they did their due diligence identifying their target and they're respectful and honest it should turn out alright.