Well over 300” Ears are usually 9-10” Nose to eye is 11-12” on a mature bull. Also the curve on the first 3 tines add a lot of inches. Not knowing the spread. Main beam length and the fourth and fifth beams are good. I know I wouldn’t pass this bull at this range. Anywhere
Don't matter, but I say it's close.... either way, I'd be very pleased with him hanging in my living room and in the freezer:) Is this a better picture than the other one in the shoot or don't shoot post, or am I just more awake now?
I use 17" nose tip to antler base and this bull will make cnelk's numbers and maybe a bit more. I do that because it's easy to see in dim light and the eye can be tough.
I'd say just over the 300 mark yep. Spread is a bit hard at that angle to say for sure but if I had 300 as a benchmark I'd shoot that bull without doubt as he's got enough to make me happy.
I do not see measurement numbers. All I see is a 340 spine FMJ arrow tipped with a Slick Trick standard 125 grains broadhead, arching on its way to the target. What a beautiful moment to live for. Ahhhh ....
JMO, only a complete dumbass would even ask that question.
That's a beautiful, mature bull with great color & character and he's in superb flesh, offering a hugely desirable shot angle at a distance which is either a slam dunk or a doesn't-matter-how-big-he-is-because-I'm-not-gonna-risk-it proposition.
If you have a bigger one on the wall already, then pass him up, but if you need a tape measure to tell you whether to shoot or not, you should go do something else before you kill a great animal and end up disappointed because of.... WHAT???
I agree with Ike... With those 4s and 5s plus beam length he would add up quickly. Any kind of spread at all and he’s well north of 300 easy. He’s also pretty prime body wise. Shoot
First off, calling people dumbasses that you don't even know is a very careless and classless remark to make.
Secondly, while all of your points after that are absolutely true, asking the question is simply academic as this bull was not killed and a lot of guys are interested for lots of different reasons, none of which take anything away from hunting or the animal.
Man.......I think that is a beautiful bull. Nice 3rds, great 4ths...love the whale tale. I dunno, I'd put him at right around 315........ He's just a really great looking bull. Nice pic.
If a guy just wants to understand how the scoring system works, that’s fine. Learning a new language, as it were. I’ve scored most of my deer mostly because I figured it would give me a better idea of what the hell people actually MEAN when they’re telling about a “140-class” buck. Kind of s “how Big is Big?” deal...
My point is simply that if the P&Y score matters in your Shoot/Don’t Shoot decision-making process, then what you’re hunting for cannot be found in the woods, on the plains, or out in the muskeg.
And JMO, that crap is going to be the death of Hunting. Rational Non-hunters (at least those who eat meat) cannot logically object to hunting for Meat or Recreation (provided there is no Wanton Waste).
“Trophy Hunting” is a perversion. All about recognition for the Mighty Hunter; not at all about Fair Chase, Sportsmanship, or the procurement of an honest meal.
And so I’ll not back away from the idea that only a complete dumbass would consider the Score before deciding to shoot this bull or find another.
It’s either Big Enough or it’s not. If you need P&Y to validate the decision, then you should play Scrabble or Golf or Poker.
GF, Shane Mahoney did an amazing two-part article on trophy hunting in "Ethic," the official publication of the Pope & Young Club. I'd recommend it. He explains it better than I can. He also has several pieces on Youtube regarding trophy hunting.
I agree, that trophy hunting can be an abomination (if glory is all the hunter seeks, yet, I feel that's a small minority of hunters and the subject of another discussion), but Mahoney's point that we all have a trophy, whether it be the experience, the antler, or the meat, is something that I agree with.
FWIW, I hunt for the experience first, the meat second, and the antler last. Yet, I'm unashamed to call myself a trophy hunter. I stand before my prey and non-hunters with a clear conscious.
And sadly, Ike, I’m afraid that puts you FIRMLY in the minority.
I’ve been doing this long enough to see Archery seasons overrun by technology-driven opportunists; from able-bodied, Crossbow-toting public land hunters in CT to now where the CO DOW is considering limiting archery tags to a lottery system because so many people are now willing to gamble the cost of a couple cases of beer on a cow-only archery tag that allows them to go do some legal, fully-armed Elk scouting ahead of the rifle season without losing their Rifle tag; if they kill a cow, they can either screw Rifle season (saving themselves the cost of a tag) or if they get a possible shot at a bull, they can just TAKE IT - and go buy a bull tag if they find it later on.
The barrier to participation in Archery season has gotten too low; the rewards for cheating the system have become too great; and it’s the people who’ve played by the same rules as were in place at the outset who are taking it in the shorts as a result.
None of the Compound Crowd can SEE it until they get pushed out of a favorite area by some Asshole with a Crossbow, but that doesn’t mean it’s not happening. Honestly, Ike, if I could count on going Elk Hunting this year, I’d invite you to share the Camp, on the mountain or off. If I find out I’m gonna make it this year, I’ll definitely let you know.
But I’ve gotta warm you up front; it won’t be what it used to be. There’s too damn many people out there now...
Gf has a point, maybe not aired in the right way or on the right thread. I want to shoot the biggest elk I can. That being said, I shot a 4 point with milk on his lips 2 years ago because I can only wait so long before the fear of an empty freezer drives me to shoot anything that moves. I like big racks, but I want pass up a small one either. ;)
I think I need to learn to count or at least start wearing my glasses when I am on the computer,... A quick look at the picture and I missed the fours:/ I was also up at 2:30AM, but now I am just making excuses! LOL... My Bad!!!! RETRACT ALL PREVIIOUS POSTS, and I now say in my enlightened state... Nice 6X6 and over 300!
True Dat. With one exception.... Out here a polished button counts as an antler and gets tagged accordingly. And once I walked up to a dead “doe” that had popped out a pair of 2” spikes when I wasn’t looking....
I'd say 325-330 and I agree with the comments about the long beams and long 5ths.
I have a 285", 326" & 360" to compare him to. The bull in this picture is way bigger than my 285" and has beams and 5ths that resemble my 360". Last year I guessed my bull at 320"-330" gross and he taped out at 326" gross.
Id say yes based on width swords and whale tails. If I were in a unit where the average bull was sub 300 or most failed to make P&Y minimum no way I'd pass on this guy. Great looking bull.
Glad ya passed on my bull GF...... mighty sporting of you..... =D
Yeah..... 300+ net even I'd think, pretty symmetrical. Biggest part is doesn't have the "Colorado 3rds".......heheheheheh..... Those tops are awesome......
Big bulls are pretty good eating too ya know, you epicurean elitists.... lots of that one to eat too.....
Man, some guys take themselves way to serious. This is simply a field judging exercise and its good to see what everyone thinks. No need to overthink it, just have fun with it.
To those that are saying 290's - 300, that's my guess as well. I have what could be that dude's twin bro hanging on my wall, and I swore when I dropped the string on him he was a 310-320 bull. Boy was I amazed when we put tape to him and found out he was only 290... But I still think he's a cool bull and grin every time I look at him on the wall!
Pretty close Will, 288 and change. The OP bull has better seconds. That's what really held my bull back. My thirds and fourths may be a little stronger. The OP bull probably has a few inches more in length (better whale tail).
I'll hold by my guess, 290-300. Since the question was, "is this bull over 300" I'll say, possible...
I think I need to learn to count or at least start wearing my glasses when I am on the computer,... A quick look at the picture and I missed the fours:/ I was also up at 2:30AM, but now I am just making excuses! LOL... My Bad!!!! RETRACT ALL PREVIIOUS POSTS, and I now say in my enlightened state... Nice 6X6 and over 300!
At first glance, I put this bull at 320. Looking closer, probably 315, but I almost always guess on the low side. I would have shot him on all but about 3 of my elk hunts.
Bigred's bull has way smaller fronts than the bull in the picture. He looks 288. It's interesting that most of the guys who have him at under 300 don't live in elk country. Listen to the guys who hunt big elk every year and know what to look for.
The good thing about using P&Y measurements as a reference is being able to identify a mature animal. If you commit to shooting nothing under P&Y minimums or a 300" elk, you will have a longer, more satisfying hunt. Once you make that commitment, you will not believe the experiences you enjoy. I've never regretted holding out for a bigger animal. Ever! Even when I went home without.
I've only shot 2 animals in the past 10 years that didn't make P&Y minimums. I can't imagine anyone having more enjoyable hunts than I've experienced and it's all because I held out for something bigger.
Some people who see this pic guess that this bull is over 300" but it actually grosses 270"
Some people who see this pic guess that this bull is over 300" but it actually grosses 270"
When I posted this on the meatpole with the 360" gross score some people doubted the score and thought it was closer to 300"
When I posted this on the meatpole with the 360" gross score some people doubted the score and thought it was closer to 300"
Here's the 270" rack inside of the 360" rack for a little perspective.
Here's the 270" rack inside of the 360" rack for a little perspective.
I think it's very difficult to estimate score based on photos when you have nothing to compare the bull to for perspective. I think these photos help demonstrate that.
Or this one, which brought about a 60" range in guesses on an other thread... An inch or two here and there makes a big difference with 21measurements.
If you look at enough pictures of dead elk and see the measurements, you get an idea. Mike, your first bull obviously has short beams and if you're just looking at the length of the 5ths, I can see how you'd get thrown off. The OP's bull has main beams that reach back 1/2 of that bull's body. Once you have some perspective, then you can start to judge tine length and mass.
For me. Comparing the rack of an animal walking with little reference and the picture angle taken from above the animal. And comparing it to a picture of Someone sitting behind an animal with that picture taken from below make it hard for some to seperate the two. Some see a 280 bull posed just right and compare it to the one above. I find it easier to use before and after pictures to educate myself. Comparing a posed animal with the one above usually will not work.
This thread just goes to show a lot of people don't know what a 300" bull looks like... and further promotes the idea that even fewer get shot than are reported. I have 3-4 very similar to this one and none of them made it...all high 290's
It also shows that 300" bull sightings and killings get thrown around a lot. Most of them aren't that big. The reality of it is, a 300" bull is a BIG bull and it takes a lot of antler to get there. Really gives you an appreciation for those bigger animals.
The video above clearly shows a 290” ish bull. Much shorter tines, beams than the OP picture. Again the angle of the original pic is from above making any animal look smaller.
Be careful guys.... They'll tell you that you don't live in "elk country" and have know idea how to judge big bulls... I'm sure their wives will tell that's not all they exaggerate about! ;)
No offense BigRed...and I don't live in elk country either...but you referenced your bull as "what could be that dude's twin bro". Those two bulls are nowhere close IMO. My initial reaction to the OP photo is easily over 300", probably closer to 320". Would have guessed your bull 280ish. Both good bulls, but if I had both in bow range...I know which one I'm shooting.
Jim, I can see where living in elk country could provide an advantage, but I can say with complete certainty....living in whitetail country doesn't seem to help alot of guys when it comes to field judging whitetail bucks! LOL!
Jaq, I didnt post in yours because I was pretty confused but looking at the back antler you were holding onto, vs the antler closer to the camera, the back antler looked like it was a 300” bull and the front antler looked like it was a 360” bull! Camera angles!!!!! Nmarch picture is a great example. He’s so far behind the bull it makes it hard to judge.
Actually it’s not that I’m far back from the bull, it’s that the bull is quartering to the camera and I’m sitting flat on my butt rather than kneeling on a knee. I never try to take photos to make my animals seem bigger, I just take 100’s of photos and some come out good and others don’t. It’s too hard to judge animals based on photos.
This one ended up grossing 301, net 286, I think. I passed him up on this day when i called him in because I was hunting one the next size bigger. Ended up shooting him with a few days left in the season.
Ucs, I can try to find the score sheet when I get back home. Honestly, most of the deduction was in that fifth, plus the normal odds and ends from side to side. He had two devil points that were deductions too. But overal he looks really symmetrical aside from the fifths. Cameras tend to create a "fish eye" effect, which is why someone sitting behind an animal even a little can create a distorted size perception. Edit: I just went in the basement and measured his 5ths. The closer one is 13", the further one is 7". So 6" of deductions right there, plus another 4" for the devil points.
Jaq. In my eyes. That is as pretty of a bull as they come. Beautiful looking rack. A trophy for sure. I’ve seen 360-390” AZ bulls that weren’t as pretty. Score much higher but straight beams and white bleached rack. Not that I would pass them of course, but as far as a bull you picture in your mind, your bull has it.
Altitude sick, thats sorta what I thought too. I have a gorgeous 350+ bull on the wall that's symmetrical and very pretty, but there's something about that whale tail bull even though he's 50" smaller. Eye of the beholder.
Can somebody help me out here with the definition of “Devil Points“?
And FWIW, it’s good to have a way to communicate “how big is Big?”, but it just kills me to think that a guy could have a great hunt, take a great Bull, and then talk himself into being disappointed just because of some stupid deductions rule....
Utter insanity. But o guess anybody who functions that way has paid good money for that disappointment, so he probably deserves it....
On an elk, "devil points" typically occur either on the brows, or on the main beam near the brows.
GF, seems like many of those you reference are folks dead set on "making the book" and their guide either overestimates the size on the hoof, or is just a bad field judge. TV elk hunts routinely inflate the estimate vs. actual size, which may give some the wrong ideas. 270 bulls become "300" for the camera.
I don't field judge bulls by estimating lengths of tines, beams, width, etc. I just look at them and get an overall feel for their score and I'm almost always within 10" which is close enough for me.
I'm not at the point and probably never will be to the point that I care if a bull is over 300", well at least not until I hunt Arizona. I just try to hold out for a decent 6x6 and if he happens to break 300" that's just a bonus. I really don't care about score, for me it's just a way to reference and describe the bulls size.
I've killed 250", 270" & 285" 6x6's and they mean just as much to me as the ones over 300".
Last year I called a 330" class bull to within 30 yards, drew back but couldn't get a shot. An hour later I called a 260" class 6x6 to within 22 yards and drew back on him twice but couldn't get a clear shot. I would have been happy with no regrets if I would have killed him, even after the close call with the 330" bull. After that I passed up a couple smaller bulls. 4 days later I called in a 326" and killed him. Just luck of the draw that I didn't tag out on the 260" bull I guess...
Jaq you’re right. My eye keeps going to the 5th on the left side. It makes the whale look huge! I agree, beautiful bull. And brad, you’re right, I don’t care if it scores 180”, they’re all amazing.
Mike X2!! That's how elk hunting should be! Too many guys get so caught up in scores, you know kinda like trying to keep up with the Jonses! Things have really switched gears over the years for the worst!
We should all be proud we have our health & the will to want to hunt those elusive bastages!
My son talked to me about this thread and I see a couple ask if I might put another photo or two on to give you a better idea, as it is hard to judge some elk with just one view. Here's another that might make a few of you change your guess--maybe some lower and maybe some higher. Anyway it the same bull but this time you get more of a front view of his antlers rather than just the side.
The key to the first pic was that the bull was quartered away, that makes his fronts look small. You have to look at his main beams and not only how long they are reaching back to his mid body, but also how they are trying to grow G6s between the tips and the G5s. Once you have an idea of the main beam length, you can get an idea of what the mass really is because the usual way to judge mass is from a quartered to or frontal shot looking at the bases, but that's thrown off on a quartered away photo as demonstrated in reverse by the photos of the bulls at the end of the thread. I stick to my original post regarding this bull on the other thread that this is a good bull that a very rare guy would pass on. If after seeing BB's latest photos you still think this bull is in the 290-300 range, I just don't get it. This is a mature bull.
Again it’s the angles. The one showing his true size is from slightly below not from above like the first one. It’s fun to go back and read the posts now. Of course most of us agree, very few are scoring this bull on the hoof. We are shooting.
So much for the weak fronts and average thirds from the first photo! Talk about a different angle changing perspective! Note to self.....320"?... maybe a year or two prior!
I agree with Ike on the comments about judging based on beam length and mass. I'm happy with my original guess of 325-330 and realize now that I may have been a little conservative... Either way, I'm shooting.
I'm having fun with this thread so I thought I'd throw in another. Judging a big 5x5 is even harder in my opinion. This is a rifle kill, but thought it would be appropriate since we are just discussing how hard it is to judge size from one pic. Any guesses?
Hell of a 5, Brun! Truly a once in several lifetimes bull.
A buddy of mine has a 346” net 5x5 from Nevada. This one here is not too far off of that one, but I am gonna call him 330” cause he’s a little shorter beamed and looks like he might be a bit off on the point length versus that bull.
Dirk, Altitude and Treeline are all very close. We measured him at 341 gross. We didn't bother with net, but he surely has around 6 inches of deductions, so that would put him around 335. For those of you that guessed much lower, remember that on a 5x5 you still get 8 circumference measurements, so you only lose the 2 tine length measurements compared to a 6x6. Those are certainly important, but a large bull like this that is strong everywhere else can still rack up a lot of points. I had a front view of this bull also, but I can't seem to find it. If I can locate I will post for another perspective.
Elk Foundation had a banquit that I attended, and as a fund raiser there was a guess the score of a 5x5. Winning score was 380. Still a little shy of the actual score.
Dang! I was way off on Bruns giant 5x5. I thought he looked big I just wouldn't let myself go there! Love that bull. Did not know you still got those other mass measurements but I still would have been way off.
Ok Dave I'm going 353" on the top pic and 264" on the bottom bull. Great tine length on both of them, smaller bull is skinny and short main beams but I bet he looked incredible from the front with those thirds!
Dave, we already guessed the others correctly. I think it was you that didn’t think the original was 300” When it was pretty clear it was well over that. Not even close to 300”. Everyone can be off by 10” from one bad angle. Or someone sitting 10’ behind the antlers.
Hey guys, I looked up the instructions before I posted that info. It does state that if a 5th point doesn't exist you measure half way between the 4th point and the tip of the main beam. I'm not smart enough to know how to post a link, but the site I looked on was called the Journal of Mountain Hunting and it had the B and C Official Guide / Measuring and Scoring Rocky Mountain Elk. As far as these two elk are concerned, I'm guessing the 6x6 at right around 300 and the second one, which actually has 6 on one side at 285. Both very nice bulls, congrats.
ALL antlered big game animals receive four (4) circumference measurements per side.....no mater the configuration of the antlers and/or amount of points......and yes, I’m an OM for both Clubs.
I found the front view of the 5x5 I posted earlier and am posting to give another perspective. I think we all agree that it becomes easier to judge with more than one view.
Well this has been a good thread--I guess I am not alone in having some difficulty in correctly judging bigger bulls. This is my unit 10 bull that I was certain would score 340 + when watching him and his 40 plus cows for over an hour at 800 yards with 15x56 binos. At 20 yards, just before I let the arrow loose, I could see the tine length weakness of the thirds, swords and tops but he still looked so magnificent being wide and heavy---and I was so grateful for the "gift" that I didn't hesitate but for only an instant. So I had him officially measured for Pope and Young by Ron McCoy in Hotchkiss......what do you reckon he actually scored?
Okay so here is a more true to size photo that makes him easier to judge. I will admit that I was surprised at how low he scored, but I can truthfully say that I am thrilled with the bull, and thankful to have had such a great hunt. A quick, clean kill, amazing time spent with family and friends, and the steaks that grace our table, certainly can't be measured in inches!
This proves again how difficult it can be to judge an animal from one picture. Everything you say about the true value of the hunt is certainly true, but since we're playing the guessing game I'll drop my guess by about 20 inches. That first shot really makes him look bigger.
Got inside info so won’t guess on timberline’s bull.
As he says, there is so very much more to a trophy animal than a score. If you are hung up on scores, you are missing so much in this great sport of ours.
Congratulations again on a great bull and a great hunt!
My bull I thought was 330 minimum was measured at 323 gross and 311 net so some of you were very close! Daves bull looks a bit longer in tine length so I say 328 gross
Dave, you are right that most people probably overestimate a little, but I'm sure the guesses were for gross score, not net. I never even think about net when looking at a bull and I guessed right at 300, and 285 on your two bulls, which is basically right on. I also looked at all the guesses, and only 4 people were over 320, which is pretty far off, but 4 others guessed 310 or less. These guesses were very close, especially considering deductions. That is a 300 class bull, as half of the respondents guessed. Your contention that 9 of 10 got it wrong is simply not accurate.
Looks like Dave's sole mission is an attempt to point out that he's right and everybody else is wrong.
I didn't guess on either of his bulls but being within 10"-20" is close enough for me...
And no outfitter has ever measured my bulls or even touched them, other than the one time I had an outfitter pack one out on a horse for me. And he was more concerned about keeping the nut sack to stretch over his saddle-horn than he was with measuring antlers.
Dave I’m confused. You said the op bull wouldn’t hit 300 and it’s obviously a 360”. Then a bunch of people called your bull a 300” bull which it is. And now you’re angry and calling people whiners. What am I missing here?
Pics can definitely be deceiving. I enjoy these threads because it helps me improve my elk judging skills. Sometimes I'm close sometimes I'm way off. The bull I killed this year officially grossed 9" over what I thought he'd score from several trail cam pics. He akso had 12" in deductions so I really wasn't off that much. My wife has no idea what 6" is but I don't get pissy with her if she overestimates..lol
The problem with him is that his other hoof suffers and while he scores high gross, the hoof deductions really hurt his net! haha Just trying to offer up plenty of perspective!!
THP, just realized I never responded to your guess on the last bull I posted. You read it very well. The bottom half truly looks like a 370 bull, but the mains are pretty short and its also not real wide. 335 gross.
