|
|
01-05-2016, 12:00 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 46,096
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by catnthehat
I'd be draggin that antler back with me as well, that is for sure!
Even a sudden jerk from him if he got shot may send that one flying, the other one doesn't look like it was gone long!
Cat
|
I can just imagine someone trying to glue it back on.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
|
01-05-2016, 12:07 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: edmonton
Posts: 11,434
|
|
You know guys, insults aside, those pics do show a huge flaw in my argument. When I posted the reg change suggestion I did so because in BC the one antler, or one side was explained as being much better because a lot of times you only see one side and if that side is legal then the harvest would be legal. I can see how funny that looks/sounds when you show those animals with big horns on only one side but I'm sure the regs take those kind of situations into account.
When you are searching for a bull moose that must be 3 points or larger and are told that it only has to have one antler that size to be legal, where in AB both sides have to 3 points, you see a difference immediatly. Same thing when your told that if one antler is below a certain length it is Antlerless.
Makes me wonder if I either misunderstood the BC reg, or need to study the reg further. I'm looking at pg. 42 of the AB reg book, and while it seems to be saying that 1 deer antler over 4" makes it Antlered, I see nothing to indicate what constitutes a legal Antlered moose.
Beginning to wonder if perhaps I had it wrong about this reg. Definetly something not adding up here.
|
01-05-2016, 12:12 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beaverlodge
Posts: 1,859
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterninja
You know guys, insults aside, those pics do show a huge flaw in my argument. When I posted the reg change suggestion I did so because in BC the one antler, or one side was explained as being much better because a lot of times you only see one side and if that side is legal then the harvest would be legal. I can see how funny that looks/sounds when you show those animals with big horns on only one side but I'm sure the regs take those kind of situations into account.
When you are searching for a bull moose that must be 3 points or larger and are told that it only has to have one antler that size to be legal, where in AB both sides have to 3 points, you see a difference immediatly. Same thing when your told that if one antler is below a certain length it is Antlerless.
Makes me wonder if I either misunderstood the BC reg, or need to study the reg further. I'm looking at pg. 42 of the AB reg book, and while it seems to be saying that 1 deer antler over 4" makes it Antlered, I see nothing to indicate what constitutes a legal Antlered moose.
Beginning to wonder if perhaps I had it wrong about this reg. Definetly something not adding up here.
|
Again your wrong. In AB you only need one horn to be legal. In a 6 point elk zone, if one side had 6 legal points it's good to go. Doesn't matter if there are 0-99 on the other side.
Antlered in AB is defined as 1 antler longer than 4". Be it moose elk or deer
|
01-05-2016, 12:21 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 46,096
|
|
Quote:
When you are searching for a bull moose that must be 3 points or larger and are told that it only has to have one antler that size to be legal, where in AB both sides have to 3 points, you see a difference immediatly. Same thing when your told that if one antler is below a certain length it is Antlerless.
|
Wrong yet again, on both counts.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
|
01-05-2016, 12:24 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,917
|
|
Omg.
|
01-05-2016, 12:25 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,818
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by blgoodbrand1
Again your wrong. In AB you only need one horn to be legal. In a 6 point elk zone, if one side had 6 legal points it's good to go. Doesn't matter if there are 0-99 on the other side.
Antlered in AB is defined as 1 antler longer than 4". Be it moose elk or deer
|
Exactly....
Nothing in Alberta states both side have to meet the minimum.
Antlered is anything is over 4 inches of antler...applies to deer moose and elk.
We don't count moose points in Alberta
Like was stated only 1 side of anything needs to meet the minimum reg. in a three point elk zone one side need 3 points, in a six point zone only one side needs 6 points....the other side can be gone for the purpose of the regs.
You can say sorry anytime Ninja
LC
__________________
|
01-05-2016, 12:26 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,818
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talking moose
Omg.
|
X a billion
LC
__________________
|
01-05-2016, 12:31 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 46,096
|
|
This thread is a train wreck.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
|
01-05-2016, 12:49 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: edmonton
Posts: 11,434
|
|
Well boys and girls, when I started this thread I said I wouldn't try to defend or add to the reg. change suggestion (that went out the window), But I never said I wouldn't pull it from consideration. It seems that I might have misunderstood the wording or interpetationof the wording in the BC regs, and how they differed from AB's regs. So for now this suggestion is being put on the shelf where I might look at it further some time in the future. It does seem that I couldn't see a flaw in my suggestion because it was so obvious.
As for some fools suggestion that I owe him an appologie, I must thank him for that. At least I got one good laugh out of this. I am gratefull however for the info. about antlers on a moose. Nice to see actual info. provided instead of the usual "your a hunter you should know this already". Info. is always better then sarcasm.
|
01-05-2016, 12:50 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary,Alberta
Posts: 1,060
|
|
...bunch of you beat me to it....
|
01-05-2016, 12:56 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beaverlodge
Posts: 1,859
|
|
#4 Antlered vs Antlerless
Seems to be a basic misunderstanding of hunting regulations as seen in numerous threads over a number of years, as well as an not only an unwillingness to admit to such but blatantly arguing after proven wrong.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:57 PM.
|